|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Report Link Third Circuit Clarifies Definition of Management-Level Employee in Harassment ClaimsLittler Mendelson, P.C. - June 19, 2009 On June 8, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit handed down a decision that may narrow employers' liability in hostile work environment claims involving co-worker harassment. In Huston v. Procter & Gamble Paper Products Corp., the Third Circuit held that an employee with mere supervisory authority does not qualify as a "management-level" employee and therefore the supervisory employee's knowledge of alleged co-worker harassment is not imputed to the employer. Report Link Title VII “Supervisor” Must Affect Terms and Conditions of Employment.Ogletree Deakins - December 04, 2008 Under Title VII, an employer can be held liable for a hostile work environment created by a supervisor. That situation differs from a hostile work environment created by a co-worker, where the company is liable only if the complainant can show that the company was negligent in discovering or remedying the situation. Recently, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the definition of “supervisor” under Title VII, and determined that a supervisor is not a person who simply possesses authority to oversee an individual’s job performance. In order to be classified as a “supervisor” for purposes of liability under Title VII, that person must have the power to “directly affect the terms and conditions of the plaintiff’s employment,” including the power to hire, fire, promote, or demote. Report Link Conduct Not Directed at Plaintiff May Support Claim of Hostile Environment.Ogletree Deakins - December 04, 2008 In order to successfully support a claim of hostile work environment under Title VII, an employee must show that the offending conduct was “sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive work environment.” One federal appellate court recently held that offensive conduct not witnessed by an individual may still contribute to that individual’s claim that a workplace environment was hostile, and should be admitted as part of the employee’s Title VII lawsuit. Report Link Sexual Harassment Update: Requests For Coffee Prompts Female Employee To Sue For Sexual Harassment.Barker Olmsted & Barnier - July 11, 2008 Tamara Klopfenstein was a part-time receptionist for National Sales & Supplies for six weeks. During her employment, two vice presidents regularly asked her to bring them coffee. Report Link Court Holds that Workplace Context Is Relevant to Sexual Harassment Claims in the Gaming Industry.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - June 04, 2008 On May 15, 2008, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi granted partial summary to Circus Circus, Mississippi, Inc. d/b/a Gold Strike Casino Resort having concluded that the plaintiff Debra Brockington's allegations of sexual harassment were not so severe or pervasive as to alter the terms and conditions of her employment. In making its decision, the court considered the context of Brockington's employment as a casino bartender. The court, however, denied Gold Strike's motion for summary judgment on Brockington's retaliation claim. Report Link The Fifth Circuit Finds that Alleged Touching Can Be Severe Workplace Harassment (pdf).Phelps Dunbar LLP - August 29, 2006 In another recent Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision, the
federal appeals court again reversed a district court’s grant of summary
judgment in favor of an employer. In McKinnis v. Crescent Guardian,
Inc., 2006 WL 1880364 (C.A. 5th (La.)), the Court was faced
with a claim of alleged workplace sexual harassment. Report Link Men's Temper Tantrums That Bother Women May Be Sex Discrimination.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - September 14, 2005 Screaming and yelling by men at work may now be sex-based discrimination if women at work find the behavior more intimidating than men do. On September 2, 2005, in E.E.O.C. v. National Education Association, (No. 04-35029), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the “reasonable woman” standard applies to workplace abusive conduct, even if there is no sexual content to the behavior. This decision significantly expands the types of behaviors that may furnish a basis for a claim of discrimination.
|
Employment 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