Close

Articles Posted in Hiring & Firing

Updated:

875,000 reasons why the customer isn’t always right

A staffing company allegedly fulfilling a customer’s discriminatory hiring practices learned this lesson the hard way. Two years ago, the EEOC announced that it had sued a staffing company that allegedly honored requests that some business clients made over several years to fill positions with only male workers. The EEOC…

Updated:

Three reasons why a Texas federal court may block the FTC’s noncompete rule nationwide

At noon ET today on Zoom, we aim to cover everything employers need to know now about the Federal Trade Commission’s blunderbuss Non-Compete Rule. (We may have a few seats left. Click here to register for this free Zoom powered by HRLearns.) If we don’t actually cover “everything” this afternoon, I wanted to highlight here three arguments from a brief…

Updated:

“This case arises from a workplace romance.” It began as “an affair” when “they were not yet colleagues, only lovers.”

Kind of sounds like the start of a beautiful movie or novel, doesn’t it? Unfortunately, however, it became more Lady Gaga. Or, more precisely, the writings of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals adjudicating an on-again-off-again sexual relationship between the “lovers” who became “colleagues” in the “workplace” and, later, plaintiff and…

Updated:

An employer that supposedly instructed employees to pray away COVID-19 now must face religious discrimination claims.

Colloquially, today’s topic is “reverse religious discrimination.” But, more accurately, it’s about a claim of “religious nonconformity.” In plain English, what happens when an employee refuses to comply with their employer’s religion? The case involves a video editor who started working for a company in 2019. At first, things were…

Updated:

This, if true, is what we call direct evidence of race discrimination

Yesterday’s post discussed how direct evidence “proves impermissible discriminatory bias without additional inference or presumption,” i.e., the proverbial smoking gun. But smoking gun evidence in discrimination cases is rare. Employers aren’t out there telling employees that their race will cost them their jobs. Well, most employers, that is. Last night, I…

Updated:

Two white men suing for discrimination got called out for a “serious misunderstanding of the law or its purposeful misapplication.”

They lost. We’ll get to why in a bit. First, I’ll provide some context. During the plaintiffs’ employment, the defendant received complaints that they were (1) regularly engaging in sexually derogatory commentary, (2) discussing drug use, (3) speaking derogatorily about a transgender employee, and (4) sometimes speaking in a homophobic…

Updated:

Proving a disability in court isn’t that hard. (Even judges mistake how easy it is.)

A man walks into a job interview. Years earlier, he sustained an injury that caused him to walk with a limp and requires him to extend his leg when seated. He had applied for one of the company’s open positions. And since he satisfied the minimum experiential and educational requirements,…

Updated:

Oh, you think you know retaliation, do you? Wait until you see this.

Yesterday, I read a press release in the EEOC’s Virtual Newsroom announcing the resolution of a retaliation lawsuit. In my twenty-plus years of practicing employment law, I didn’t recall seeing retaliation claims quite like this one. According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, the general manager complained to the company’s Acting Chief…

Updated:

Firing fast in certain situations can help defeat retaliation claims. Yes, firing FAST!

The common logic is that firing an employee shortly after complaining about workplace discrimination isn’t a good look. Indeed, the tighter the temporal proximity between the two events, the more likely the employee will perceive that the employer retaliated against them for their complaint. But. I read a commonsense Ninth…