Total Articles: 6
FordHarrison LLP • November 28, 2018
In this three-part series, we are exploring best practices for handling a charge of discrimination. The first part of the series addressed important preliminary questions you should be asking upon initial receipt of the charge. The second part dealt with best practices for the investigation phase of the administrative process. This final part of the series will address what you should do once the EEOC issues its finding.
FordHarrison LLP • November 07, 2018
So you’ve just received a charge of discrimination from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) or a local agency. Now what? In this three-part series, we will explore best practices for handling a charge.
Fisher Phillips • August 21, 2018
Overturning 40 years of precedent, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that an employee’s failure to file an EEOC charge does not necessarily bar consideration of a private discrimination lawsuit. By concluding that an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charge is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit, the federal appeals court’s August 17 decision provides a new lifeline for disgruntled employees and former employees to bring suit against their employers (Lincoln v. BNSF Railway Company, Inc.).
Ogletree Deakins • March 19, 2018
On February 26, 2018, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals rendered an en banc decision in Zarda v. Altitude Express that significantly expands employees’ rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ten judges joined at least in part in the majority decision and held that sex discrimination under Title VII encompasses discrimination based on sexual orientation. Three judges dissented and would not have extended Title VII protection to sexual orientation. This decision came 11 months after the Eleventh Circuit declined to recognize sexual orientation as a protected category under Title VII in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital and 10 months after the Seventh Circuit disagreed, holding that sexual orientation is covered by Title VII, in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College.
Fisher Phillips • March 02, 2012
The cataclysmic effects of the longest and deepest recession since the 1929 depression will significantly change many aspects of our society for generations. The devastating impact of the recession on large segments of the workforce can be counted as one of the more significant effects. While it remains to be seen how the recession will change the psyche of this generation over the long term, one objective measure showing one aspect of the change is the large increase in EEOC charges as the economy nose dived.
Ogletree Deakins • January 14, 2009
Before an individual may file a lawsuit under Title VII or the ADEA, he or she is required to file (or cross-file) a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. The charge is legally sufficient only if it describes with particularity the parties and the actions or practices of which the individual is complaining. The scope of a plaintiff’s right to file a federal lawsuit is determined by the contents of that charge; that is, the lawsuit must be based upon the claims described in the charge, or reasonably related to those described in the charge. Typically, a claim submitted to federal court will be dismissed if the EEOC charge alleges one basis of discrimination, and the formal litigation alleges another, unrelated basis.