In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, an economic crisis that is predicted to be as bad as the great depression, and unrest over racial inequality and police brutality that is giving birth to a global movement for social change, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia (Case
Title VII
Sexual Orientation Discrimination Not Recognized Under Title VII
By Lukas Clary on
Posted in Discrimination, New Legislation and Regulations
Federal law has long prohibited discrimination based on a person’s sex. In recent years, several courts have held that discrimination based on failure to conform to a gender stereotype is a form of prohibited sex-based discrimination. But courts across the country have been more divided about whether those same laws preclude discrimination based on one’s…
Who is the Supervisor? Supreme Court Resolves Long Simmering Question Under Title VII
By Ramona Carrillo on
Posted in Harassment, Labor Law
By: Chuck Post
In Vance v. Ball State University, the Supreme Court clarified a long open question, “Who is a supervisor under Title VII?” The question is important because employers are directly responsible for employee harassment by a supervisor. In the case of worker harassment of a co-worker, however, employer liability is less direct.
Partnerships Beware! Partners May Have Claims for Unlawful Retaliation under FEHA
By Ramona Carrillo on
By: James Kachmar
On May 16, 2012, a California Appellate Court issued its ruling in Fitzsimons v. California Emergency Physicians Medical Group and held that a partner could state a claim for unlawful retaliation against her partnership under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). …
Continue Reading Partnerships Beware! Partners May Have Claims for Unlawful Retaliation under FEHA