Photo of J. William Manuel

Will Manuel focuses his practice primarily on commercial and employment litigation. Will advises businesses on issues involving age discrimination, sexual harassment and wage/overtime disputes for both large and small businesses in across Mississippi and other jurisdictions. His clients include numerous manufacturers and commercial interests as well as various insurance and financial services companies. He has worked to defend these clients in both MDL litigation and individual actions brought in Mississippi. Will’s focus is on active litigation from the initial discovery process through trial. View articles by Will.

Changes in supervision may result in fresh ways of doing things. Certain rules that were never fully enforced may now come to the forefront. Can a new supervisor’s radical change in a long-term employee’s performance rating be the basis for a claim of pretext in an employment discrimination claim? The Seventh Circuit appears to say

As this blog has consistently noted in the past, one of the most effective ways to combat unfounded allegations in the workplace is diligent record-keeping. Many employers have “point-based” disciplinary policies in which certain violations earn an employee points that are reflected in their personnel record. Once an employee reaches a certain level of points

For more than 50 years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has required certain employers to submit annual EEO-1s with workforce demographic data (i.e., number of employees by job category and by sex and race or ethnicity). Additionally, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs regulations require certain federal contractors to file this data as well.

The DOL issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing, among other things, to increase the salary threshold for white-collar overtime exemptions. You may recall that there was a lot of discussion about this back in 2016 when the DOL proposed a rule raising the threshold from $23,660 to $47,476. Litigation ensued, and a court held

If you are an employer covered by the federal Fifth Circuit (Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi), you are probably familiar with the “ultimate employment decision” standard: In determining whether an employee suffered an adverse action under Title VII, you look to only “ultimate” decisions (e.g., hiring, termination, non-promotion). The landscape has just changed. In

Many workplaces allow their employees to listen to music or radio on site. But what if employees choose to blast “sexually graphic” and “violently misogynistic” songs throughout a warehouse? Does it matter whether the workforce in the warehouse is only men or only women? In Sharp, et al., v. S&S Activewear, Inc., the Ninth

Do you have a “no fault” attendance policy or some other way in which employees get points for absences? If so, be careful. A recent Eleventh Circuit matter, EEOC v. Eberspaecher North America, Inc. suggests that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) wants to check out those policies to see if there is an ADA

Can you require your workers to arbitrate claims? What if they work in interstate commerce? Recently several courts have addressed the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and when it applies to arbitration agreements included in employment contracts. Typically, courts have held that the FAA compels employees to pursue certain disputes before a private