Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Outten & Golden LLP
11 followers -
Advocates for Workplace Fairness
Advocates for Workplace Fairness

11 followers
About
Posts

Post has attachment
Holiday work parties: how do you know what behavior is acceptable/what crosses the line? O&G attorney Nina Frank, who handles employee-based harassment cases, is interviewed.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
The Seventh Circuit decides a couple of useful things in this Title VII and § 1983 national-origin discrimination, harassment, and retaliation case, set in a City of Chicago firehouse. First, it holds that even petty activity such as lunch-stealing may constitute part of a hostile work environment when the entire pattern of conduct is considered together. Second, even such tedious activities as constantly shifting an employee from site to site, and intensively challenging fitness for duty after medical leave, may constitute materially adverse employment actions.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

Plaintiffs Bar Perspective: Outten & Golden's Wayne Outten
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Attorney Christopher McNerney is quoted - NYDN: background check discrimination at Madison Square Garden #BantheBox
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
This decision was an instant sensation in the news and social media: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 held to protect employees from discrimination because of sexual orientation (and, presumably, gender identity as well). Digging into the majority and separate opinions, we can trace different possible outcomes when this question inevitably reaches the U.S. Supreme Court.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Three plaintiffs successfully defend a jury verdict totaling $204,000 in a Title VII, Equal Pay Act and Iowa Civil Rights Act case, plus $269,877.67 in attorney's fees. The court casts doubt on the use of a "market forces" defense by employers to justify lower pay for women, yet also holds that if such a defense were valid, the employer presented insufficient evidence to warrant an instruction.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
This takes the cake: an employee on the night shift at an Idaho supermarket is accused of (and fired for) taking a cake from the bakery's "stales cart" without permission to serve to co-workers. The Ninth Circuit thinks that a jury could find management's story unpalatable, though, and remands it for a trial.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
News sources report that many employers are complying with the new overtime regulations.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
The D.C. Circuit holds that even facially benign statements about an employee - in a given context - can constitute evidence of discriminatory intent. The panel finds that a supervisor's alleged compliment to a Black employee for "speaking well," and later telling the same employee that he was not a "good fit" for the organization, might be evidence of racial stigmatizing. It also discusses that an employer's "honest belief" must also be reasonable under the circumstances.
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded