Minnesota - Human Rights Act

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz signed a bill significantly amending the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) on May 15, 2024. The MHRA, otherwise known as Minnesota’s anti-discrimination statute, already prohibited discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, national origin,

On February 8, 2023, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued its first significant decision interpreting the state’s employment discrimination law, the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), in three years. In a ruling that will likely be hailed as a victory by employees and employers alike, the supreme cour

Minnesota has now joined at least 19 other states in enacting a CROWN Act, which stands for “Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair.” The Act, which in Minnesota has come in the form of brief but important amendments to the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), protects

In a much-anticipated decision, the Minnesota Supreme Court on June 3, 2020, declined to abandon the requirement that harassing conduct be “severe or pervasive” to be actionable under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA).

Earlier this month MIOSHA released a new Fact Sheet entitled Eyewashes and Safety Showers. Briefly, this Fact Sheet states the general requirement that:

On April 23, 2018, Minnesota House Majority Leader Joyce Peppin introduced HF 4459, a bill to amend the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”) to change the legal standard for sexual harassment. The bill, which has wide bipartisan support and 34 cosponsors, has a companion bill in the Senate sponsored

A Michigan appellate court denied an attempt by an employee to receive a severance jackpot based on a drafting mistake made by his former employer. Notwithstanding the employee’s entitlement, based on the terms of his separation agreement, to receive approximately $81 thousand dollars per week for 3

Recently, the Minnesota Court of Appeals, in Peterson v. City of Minneapolis, ruled that a complaint process in an employer’s anti-discrimination policy may toll the statute of limitations under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). At issue was a section of the MHRA stating that the Act’s one-year

This week, Minnesota passed the Women’s Economic Security Act (WESA), a nine-part law intended to break down barriers for women in the workplace. Of direct interest to employers, the law protects employees’ discussion about wages, requires certain state government contractors to certify their compli

Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton has signed the Women’s Economic Security Act (“Act”) into law. The Act is a major piece of legislation aimed at improving working conditions for women that will have a significant impact on Minnesota businesses.

Minnesota’s Supreme Court and its Court of Appeals have long followed federal cases in interpreting state civil rights laws analogous to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (the federal anti-discrimination law), such as the Minnesota Human Rights Act and Minnesota’s Whistleblower Act. Thus, in retalia

That alleged sexually explicit behavior was directed at both men and women is irrelevant in determining the existence of a hostile work environment under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, the Minnesota Supreme Court has held. Rasmussen v. Two Harbors Fish Company d/b/a Lou’s Fish House et al., No. A11

Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton has signed a law permitting civil marriage between any two consenting persons, including same-sex couples. The new law becomes effective on August 1, 2013.

Executive Summary: Your friends may refuse to hang out with you because of your spouse, but in Minnesota, your employer generally cannot. On May 20, 2013, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued the first Minnesota appellate decision addressing marital discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights A

Explaining that whether sexual harassment occurred is a legal determination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, the Minnesota Court of Appeals has reversed a trial court’s dismissal of three employees’ suit for hostile work environment against their employers. Rasmussen v. Two Harbors Fish Co., No