Discrimination

Expert Analysis

• EEOC Hospitality Suits Offer Workplace Investigation Lessons

  

  Several recent sexual harassment and retaliation settlements with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission demonstrate that hospitality employers will face significant exposure if they conduct deficient investigations or retaliate against complainants, so they should properly intake concerns, maintain documentation, close out the investigation and follow up appropriately, say attorneys at Ogletree.

• Religious Employer Bias Ruling Lands In Unsettled Landscape

  

  Despite the Fourth Circuit's recent ruling in Doe v. Catholic Relief Services that a religious nonprofit violated federal and state antidiscrimination law by terminating health insurance coverage for a nonministerial employee's same-sex spouse, the boundary between religious autonomy and antidiscrimination law remains unsettled for lay employees, say attorneys at Ogletree.

• DOJ's Deloitte, Lockheed DEI Deals Stress Whistleblower Role

  

  The U.S. Department of Justice's recent settlements with Deloitte and Lockheed Martin over their diversity, equity and inclusion practices, launched by private whistleblowers, demonstrate to government contractors that federal enforcement can start from within, say attorneys at Hinckley Allen.

• Calif. Sex Harassment Cases Clarify Limits On EFAA Waivers

  

  Two recent rulings in California confirm that the plaintiff's knowledge drives waiver analysis under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, underscoring that employers should build a strong evidentiary record and pick their battles, says Ellen Connelly Cohen at Call & Jensen.

• Flashpoints In Focus: Navigating Anti-American Bias Scrutiny

  

  In light of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission encouraging workers to file charges alleging national origin discrimination against Americans, employers should separate political disagreement from protected status discrimination, and carefully examine language- and visa-related practices, say attorneys at Seyfarth Shaw.

• West Point Prof's Suit Tests Public Employee Speech Limits

  

  A recent complaint in New York federal court alleging that West Point unlawfully terminated a professor who challenged a directive banning references to human causes of climate change could illuminate how academic freedom and public employee speech protections apply at a military academy, say attorneys at Foley & Lardner.

• Accenture's FCA Deal Shows DEI Risks For Gov't Contractors

  

  The U.S. Department of Justice recently settled allegations that Accenture falsely certified compliance with antidiscrimination requirements in its federal contracts, underscoring how diversity goals can become a False Claims Act issue when the company requests payment from the government, say attorneys at Bass Berry.

• 2nd Circ. EFAA Ruling Shifts Employer Litigation Strategy

  

  In Diaz-Roa v. Hermes Law, the Second Circuit recently held that, under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, employers can't carve out nonharassment claims and send them to arbitration, which has implications for discovery, litigation costs and resolution strategy in EFAA-covered disputes, say attorneys at Krevolin Horst.

• How Viral Accusations Can Test Employers' Discipline Policies

  

  The employment fallout that appears to have followed a former Cornell University student's sexual assault lawsuit against seven fraternity members underscores that although employers often have freedom to fire employees over accusations, they must still make a defensible decision, says Michael Elkins at MLE Law.

• Managing Employer Risk Under Calif.'s No Robo Bosses Law

  

  California's No Robo Bosses Act marks the state's first statutory limit on using artificial intelligence in employee discipline and termination decisions, creating exposure for employers through its corroboration and notice requirements, burden-shifting framework, and potential reach under the Private Attorneys General Act, say attorneys at Reed Smith.

• Remote Work Ruling Clarifies Calif. Law Limits, With Caveats

  

  Although a California state appeals court's recent decision in Saberin v. Alation confirmed that California employment laws do not operate extraterritorially merely because a company is headquartered in the state, employers shouldn't construe this as authorization to relocate decision-makers to circumvent statutory obligations, says Hallie Aylesworth at Sheppard.

• A Nuanced Reading Of DOL's Mental Health Parity Guidance

  

  Though a recent U.S. Department of Labor bulletin may suggest that agency enforcement pressure on group health plans with respect to mental health parity is easing, the takeaways are more complex, and plan sponsors should not relax compliance efforts, say attorneys at Proskauer.

• Tips For Employers As Calif. Court Limits Harassment Liability

  

  Doe v. Wells Fargo appears to be the first published California appellate decision to determine that the harasser must have supervisory authority over the plaintiff to trigger strict liability, underscoring the value of accurately documenting job roles and reporting lines, says Ellen Connelly Cohen at Call & Jensen.