.jpg "By Editor182 [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons")
”
Picture a nerdier version of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, where persuasive legal briefs and sharp oral advocacy are like rear naked chokes and “ground and pound.”
The answer to this question, because I’m a lawyer, is “it depends.”
Naturally, of course.
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? (Mute your computer at 1:12 and 1:36)
You’ll have to pardon the headline.
I’m not nearly as articulate as the Third Circuit was in yesterday’s opinion in Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC, using words like “cognizable” and “disproportionate adverse impact.” And, even though the Third Circuit sits in Philadelphia, you won’t find local lingo like “old head” or “jawn” anywhere in the opinion.
Although, I’m pretty sure page 6 has a cheez whiz stain on it.
The lede could’ve described me in my youngers days
Many years ago
A few years ago
Several months ago
Two weeks ago
YesterdayWell, maybe it continues to describe me. At least, that’s what the note in my personnel file says.
However, we’re not here today to talk about me…
Nope, no clickbait here. And no irony in the lede either.
Plus, I feel like I’ve seen this one before.
Remember Hank the Septopus from Disney’s Finding Dory? I found his missing tentacle. And, my son ate it!
Tuesday’s Disney theme may have been germs and yuck, but we turned the corner on Wednesday.
Folks, I’m actually on vacation this week. I’m traveling with my family to Disney World.
So, let’s call it a trip.
Starting tomorrow.
Today, let’s talk about the employee who claimed sexual harassment because her male co-worker constantly stared at her with an erection — which she subsequently photographed and showed to other co-workers, and all of that morphed into a retaliation claim.
So, basically, this post will be like a sophisticated bar exam question.
The Employer Handbook Blog