Ogletree Deakins • July 28, 2016
The 2016 EEO-1 filing period is fast approaching. Once the 2016 Survey opens, companies will have until September 30, 2016 to complete their annual filing requirements. On July 25, 2016, the EEO-1 Joint Reporting Committee (JRC) notified companies that all reporting for the EEO-1 reports will now be done electronically. In previous years, companies that did not manually upload data on the EEO-1 site had to email the data file to a member of the JRC and wait for confirmation that the data file had been uploaded. Now, companies can upload data files directly to the production database according to the specifications to the JRC’s database and be informed immediately of acceptance or errors regarding the data submission.
FordHarrison LLP • July 17, 2016
Executive Summary: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has published a revised proposed rule to collect summary pay data from employers that file EEO-1 reports. The EEOC originally published a proposed rule to collect pay data in February 2016. The revised rule permits employers to use the same W-2 report to complete the EEO-1 that they use for tax purposes. It also changes the EEO-1 filing deadline to March 31 starting with the first filing in 2018. This change was designed to coordinate with the existing W-2 calendar year.
Ogletree Deakins • July 14, 2016
On July 13, 2016, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced revisions to the agency’s February 2016 proposal to revise the current Employer Information Report (EEO-1) to add a new Component 2. The current EEO-1 form, which requires covered employers to report on the gender, race, and ethnicity of its employees, will be designated as Component 1 (demographic data). Under the revised proposal, Component 2 will have two sections and will require covered employers to report aggregate W-2 wages and hours worked in 12 pay bands for each of the 10 EEO-1 job categories and 14 gender, race, and ethnicity categories on the current form. The revised rule provides for a 30-day comment period to address the proposed revisions. The comment period ends on August 15, 2016. The EEOC is also submitting the revised proposal to U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • July 14, 2016
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has released an update with revisions to its proposed EEO-1 pay data collection report. The proposal would have employers with at least 100 employees submitting to the EEOC all employees’ W-2 earnings data and actual hours worked beginning with the 2017 EEO-1 reporting cycle.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • May 31, 2016
On May 23, 2016, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Green v. Brennan, holding that the statute of limitations for a constructive discharge claim begins to run at the time the employee resigns. While the Court’s 7-1 decision was unsurprising and does not change the substantive law of constructive discharge, it provides employers and employees alike with the benefit of a clear rule for assessing the timeliness of charges alleging constructive discharge.
Franczek Radelet P.C • May 31, 2016
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the statute of limitations for purposes of filing a claim alleging constructive discharge begins to run on the date that the employee resigns, as opposed to the last discriminatory act that prompts the resignation, resolving a circuit split.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • May 25, 2016
Federal and private-sector employers alike should take note of yesterday’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Green v. Brennan. The issue in Green was whether a federal employee’s claim of discrimination in a constructive discharge case was triggered by the last act of alleged discrimination by the employer or by the date on which the employee resigned. The Supreme Court reversed the Tenth Circuit decision and held that the statute of limitations in a constructive discharge case begins to run on the date the employee resigns because that is the date when the employee has a “complete and present cause of action.”
Jackson Lewis P.C. • May 25, 2016
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the statute of limitations for an employee’s Title VII constructive discharge claim begins on the date of the employee’s notice of resignation. Green v. Brennan, No. 14-613 (May 23, 2016).
Franczek Radelet P.C • May 25, 2016
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) authorizes the award of attorneys’ fees to a party who prevails in a discrimination or retaliation claim brought under that statute. Although this fee shifting provision applies to both employee plaintiffs and employer defendants, courts routinely award fees to prevailing plaintiffs but have interpreted this provision to allow prevailing defendants to recover fees only in the rare case where the plaintiff’s claim was frivolous or unreasonable. Last week, in a helpful decision for employers, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified that a defendant-employer does not necessarily need to prevail “on the merits” of a discrimination lawsuit to be entitled to fees.
Ogletree Deakins • May 24, 2016
On May 23, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided when the limitations period for filing a lawsuit begins to run for a federal employee claiming he or she resigned—or was “constructively discharged”—due to discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. According to the Court, a federal civil servant must “initiate contact” with an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) counselor at his or her agency “within 45 days of the date of the matter alleged to be discriminatory” before he or she may file suit under Title VII. In a constructive discharge case, the Court further held, the “matter alleged to be discriminatory” includes the employee’s resignation. Thus, “the 45-day clock for a constructive discharge begins running only after the employee resigns.” Green v. Brennan, No. 14–613, Supreme Court of the United States (May 23, 2016).