Recently the Department of Labor and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued multiple items on national origin discrimination and anti-American bias. These materials signal that the agencies consider any national origin preference — including any actions favoring nonimmigrant visa holders — to be discrimination. Additionally, they make clear that multiple agencies view anti-American actions as an

When did you last update your employee handbook? With the end of the year nearing, now is a good time. Your policies should provide clear guidelines to your workforce about what you expect of them. Policies should also be a guide to HR regarding complaint procedures, discharge procedures, and even investigations if those are a

Like almost every federal agency, things have certainly changed at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the last 10 months. One of those significant changes has been the departure from investigation of claims asserting the “disparate impact” theory. A plaintiff in a disparate impact case, generally speaking, must show that a seemingly neutral policy

Employee activity on social media is a hot topic. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed a case in which a university employee was denied opportunities following a Twitter tirade. The court affirmed that the university did not discriminate against the employee, did not violate the First Amendment, and upheld the university’s actions. This

In, Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the scope of the Americans with Disabilities Act, holding that Title I’s employment discrimination provisions do not apply to individuals who are retired and no longer hold or seek employment. The decision, a 7-2 majority written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, gives employers

If a qualified job candidate asks to reschedule a second-round interview due to severe menstrual cramps associated with endometriosis, is that a request for an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act? If you deny the request, could it be the basis of a sex discrimination claim under Title VII? The EEOC thinks so and

Before June 5, 2025, the law (at least in some jurisdictions) was that majority-group employees (e.g., white or heterosexual) had to show additional “background circumstances” in addition to a prima facie case to prove discrimination­ – a heightened evidentiary standard. However, the U.S. Supreme Court recently rejected the “background circumstances” rule in Ames v. Ohio

If you have a grooming policy based on safety factors (like no beards for firefighters), does that trump an employee’s request for a religious accommodation? Maybe not. A recent Third Circuit decision, Smith v. City of Atlantic City, et al., addressed this issue and partially reversed a district court’s grant of summary judgment in

Earlier this month, in Strife v. Aldine Independent School District, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer’s delayed accommodation of an employee’s disability could amount to a failure to accommodate under the Americans with Disabilities Act. This case serves as an important reminder not only to take all requests for disability

Can you compel arbitration with an employee who is alleging sexual harassment? You may recall that in 2022, Congress enacted the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA), which precludes employers from requiring employees to arbitrate sexual harassment claims. But what if the alleged harassment occurred before the EFAA effective date?