|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Report Link Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Whether Scrapping Promotional Exam Violates Title VII.Ogletree Deakins - May 04, 2009 On April 22, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding the internal clash between Title VII’s disparate impact and disparate treatment provisions. Ricci v. DeStefano, U.S., No. 07-1428 (oral argument 4/22/09). The case is based upon the city of New Haven’s decision not to certify the results of two 2003 firefighter promotional exams - one for captain, and one for lieutenant – when 14 of the top 15 scores were earned by white candidates. The district court dismissed a lawsuit filed in 2004 on behalf of 17 white and one Hispanic firefighters; that decision was upheld by the 2d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case was accepted for argument by the Supreme Court, primarily to address the issue of whether the city’s decision violated Title VII and/or the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Report Link Manager Fired For Violating Nonfraternization Policy Loses Appeal.Ogletree Deakins - June 25, 2008 A federal appellate court recently dismissed a lawsuit brought by an African-American manager who claimed that his discharge was racially motivated because he dated (and subsequently married) a white hourly employee. According to the court, the worker failed to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination, and even if he could, there was no evidence that the company's explanation for his discharge was a pretext for unlawful bias. Report Link Tenth Circuit Finds No Pretext In Hospital's Assertion That Disruptive Physician's Privileges Should Be Terminated.Ogletree Deakins - June 03, 2008 Healthcare entities continue to monitor federal court decisions related to the relationship between hospitals and credentialed physicians to determine whether hospital bylaws are being viewed by the courts as contracts with the doctors. Recently, however, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals side-stepped the “contract” issue while addressing a race discrimination claim brought by a doctor against a hospital. Instead, it analyzed the case under the typical burden shifting framework generally applicable in federal discrimination cases. Under that analysis, the physician failed to show that race was a motivating factor in the hospital’s decision to terminate his privileges there, and his case was dismissed. Report Link The EEOC's E-RACE Initiative.Fisher & Phillips, LLP - May 29, 2007 In February, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) launched its "E-RACE" (Eradicating Racism and Colorism from Employment) Initiative. The E-RACE Initiative is designed to improve the EEOC's efforts to free the workplace of race and color discrimination. The EEOC intends to identify issues, criteria and barriers that contribute to race and color discrimination, explore strategies to improve the administrative processing and litigation of race and color discrimination claims, and enhance public awareness of race and color discrimination in employment. Report Link EEOC Compliance Manual Emphasizes Subtle Forms of Discrimination Based on Race or Color.Ford & Harrison LLP - June 08, 2006 The EEOC recently issued a new Compliance Manual Section with guidance for analyzing race and color discrimination claims under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The guidance, which is 57 pages long, includes definitions of "race" and "color" as used under Title VII; a discussion of disparate treatment, disparate impact, and harassment based on race; information on what the Commission will look for in investigating race/color discrimination charges; and best practices recommendations for preventing race/color discrimination claims. Report Link EEOC Takes Action on Race and Color Discrimination, Class-Wide Bias, and Age Claims.Jackson Lewis LLP - May 19, 2006 Facing a growing number of race and color discrimination charges, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued new guidance as to what constitutes such discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Additionally, the EEOC has announced a shift in its investigation of discrimination claims, and intends to modify existing regulations in response to recent Supreme Court decisions addressing the purpose and statutory interpretation of the Age Discrimination in Employment act. Report Link All Are Welcome Here: Preventing Customer Racial and Religious Discrimination Claims Against Your Startup (pdf).Elarbee, Thompson, Sapp & Wilson, LLP. - May 12, 2006 Cracker Barrel Old Country Store says it’s like "a little piece of home” at the next exit of the highway. A few years ago, however, numerous black customers in several states complained that their visits to the restaurant were quite unlike being welcomed home. Report Link EEOC Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Regarding Race and Color Discrimination.Jackson Lewis LLP - May 05, 2006 In the face of a growing number of race and color discrimination charges, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently issued new guidance as to what constitutes race and color discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Report Link Supreme Court Rejects "Slap You in the Face" Standard for Evaluating Qualifications Evidence in Discrimination Cases.Ford & Harrison LLP - March 02, 2006 In a significant employment related decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Eleventh Circuit used an improperly vague standard in evaluating the evidence in a race discrimination case. Accordingly, the Court ordered the Eleventh Circuit to reconsider the evidence using a more precise standard. See Ash v. Tyson Foods Inc. (Feb. 21, 2006). The Court also held that the Eleventh Circuit was wrong when it held that a supervisor's use of the term "boy" in referring to the two African American employees who sued Tyson Foods was not evidence of discrimination because it was not modified by a racial classification.
Report Link Context Counts: The Word "Boy" May Be a Racial Epithet At Work.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - February 24, 2006 In a brief unanimous opinion, the United States Supreme Court ruled on February 21, 2006 in Ash v. Tyson Foods, Inc. that the word "boy" without any words modifying it, can be a racial epithet depending on the context, inflection, tone of voice, local custom, and historical usage. Report Link "Derivative Bias" Claim Does Not Pass Muster (pdf).Ogletree Deakins - June 03, 2005 The federal appellate court with jurisdiction over Indiana employers has dismissed a “derivative discrimination” claim brought by a white warehouse worker. According to the Seventh
Circuit Court of Appeals, the worker failed to prove that the employer subjected him to any discrimination based on his race. Report Link Skin Color Bias Is Growing as a Basis for Discrimination Claims.Jackson Lewis LLP - April 07, 2004 A slowly emerging form of workplace discrimination based on color or skin tone may become a trend with the growing number of complaints filed with the courts and administrative agencies.
|
ArticlesFound: 12 ArticlesNO SUBTOPICSEmployment Law Seminars
2010 Ushers In Many Important Changes to Workplace Laws
Columbia
November 20, 2009 Fisher & PhillipsANNUAL EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATESacramento
December 1, 2009 Shaw ValenzaMonthly Webinar: Preventing Workplace Harassment (California and National)Webinar
December 1, 2009 LittlerCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late to ComplySan Francisco
December 1, 2009 Fisher & PhillipsThe Constangy Management Training Center "Employment Law 201"Tampa
December 2, 2009 ConstangyCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late to ComplyOntario
December 2, 2009 Fisher & PhillipsAudio Conference: Employee Caregivers Dealing With DementiaAudio Conference
December 2, 2009 Young ConawayClients, Adversaries and Witnesses: The Ethics of Communication in a Fast-Paced Legal World Web CastWebinar
December 4, 2009 Ford & HarrisonTaking Executive Compensation Hostage; What To DoWebinar
December 8, 2009 Baker HostetlerPREVENTING HARASSMENT AND OTHER EEO ISSUES AT WORK: IT’S ALL ABOUT RESPECT (AB 1825 COMPLIANCE)Sacramento
December 9, 2009 Shaw Valenza |
|
| ||
|
Terms of Use
|
Privacy
|
Advertising
|
About
|
Contact
|
For Law Firms
|
Partners
Copyright © 2009 elinfonet.com, llc.
The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.
This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations. As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law. None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice. The information should not be relied upon for legal advice. We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created. Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege. If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area. If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association. All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners. | ||
Federal Article Feeds