• The HR Specialist - Print Newsletter
  • HR Specialist: Employment Law
  • The HR Weekly

Discrimination / Harassment

Nepotism isn’t necessarily discriminatory

10/15/2019
Justified or not, unsuccessful candidates without an inside track may feel as if they were cheated because they weren’t related to someone with influence, who could pull strings to help them. That disappointment won’t necessarily mean they will be able to turn charges of blatant nepotism into a Title VII discrimination case.

Snapshot: Who leads efforts to address pay inequality?

10/15/2019
CEOs and other senior executives lend credibility to employer efforts to ensure women and minorities earn equal pay, but HR leads the day-to-day work.

A breakthrough for LGBT rights in High Court?

10/15/2019
Oct. 8 marked a historic day for the U.S. Supreme Court: The first time the nation’s highest court has heard oral arguments that could lead to rulings on whether discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity equals sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

’Tis the season for religious accommodation

10/10/2019
Planning for office holiday parties will begin soon. As you prepare for revelry, be aware that for some employees, holiday celebrations provoke anxiety.

No proof of bias: Religious affiliation alone doesn’t disqualify arbitrator

10/04/2019
A former employee has lost an appeal of an arbitration case in which he alleged the arbitrator should have disclosed his religious affiliation.

RIF didn’t achieve business goals? OK to repost jobs that were previously cut

10/04/2019
If you can clearly explain why you decided to reopen positions that were eliminated earlier, courts are unlikely to conclude you intended to discriminate against those who were not retained during the earlier RIF.

Your website could trigger a bias lawsuit

10/04/2019
The California Supreme Court recently confronted the question of whether a customer has standing to sue over alleged discrimination based on a visit to the business’ website rather than its brick-and-mortar locations.

Requiring English not automatically biased

10/04/2019
For years, the EEOC has taken the position that rules requiring employees to speak only English at work are discriminatory unless the employer can justify the rule as a business necessity. But now a federal court has concluded that before making an employer justify the rule’s necessity, the affected worker has to show that the policy has a disparate impact on a protected group.

EEOC takes customer harassment seriously

10/04/2019
The EEOC wants employers to know that customer preference is never a legitimate reason to allow customers to harass or otherwise discriminate against your employees.

Supreme Court to address LGBT rights at work

10/04/2019
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2019-2020 term, scheduled to begin Oct. 7, will waste no time getting directly to one of the most contentious employment law issues cases on its docket.