The 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 8 "Anti-harassment Training in Hollywood"

December 24, 2018 by Mellissa A. Schafer

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2019. In the spirit of the season, we are using the next "12 days of the holidays" to blog about one California law a day and that law's impact on California employers. On the eighth day of Christmas, my Labor and Employment attorney gave to me—eight maids a milking and AB 3082 and AB 2338. More ›

The 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 2 "Sexual Harassment Training Expanded and Then Some"

December 14, 2018 by Mellissa A. Schafer

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2019. In the spirit of the season, we are using the next "12 days of the holidays" to blog about one California law a day and that law's impact on California employers. Without further adieu, on the second day of Christmas, my Labor and Employment attorney gave to me—two turtle doves and SB 1343. More ›

On the First Day of the Holidays, My Labor and Employment Attorney Gave to Me - A Partridge in a Pear Tree and SB 826

December 12, 2018 by Mellissa A. Schafer

It's back! Hard to believe another year is coming to a close. It's even harder to believe that California has once again enacted a slew of employment laws  that go into effect in 2019. The Legislature certainly keeps California employers busy. In the spirit of the season, we are again using the "12 days of Christmas" song to blog about one California law a day and that law's impact on California employers. So, on the first day of Christmas, my Labor and Employment attorney gave to me—a partridge in a pear tree and SB 826. More ›

In Florida, One-Event Sexual Advance at a Non-Work Sponsored Party Can Support Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Claims

March 20, 2018 by Andrew M. Gordon

Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal recently decided two questions of first impression under Florida law: (1) whether a one-event sexual advance at a private, non-work sponsored party may support sexual harassment and retaliation claims, and (2) whether rejecting a supervisor’s sexual advance is protected “opposition.” The court answered both questions “yes.” More ›

Second Circuit Declares Sexual Orientation Discrimination is Sex Discrimination under Title VII

February 27, 2018 by Concepcion A. Montoya

Acknowledging the “changing legal landscape” surrounding Title VII protections against discrimination, the Second Circuit overturned prior precedent and held sexual orientation is discrimination because of sex. The Second Circuit, sitting en banc in Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., examined the issue “from the perspective of sex stereotyping,” and unequivocally concluded that “sexual orientation discrimination is predicated on assumptions about how persons of a certain sex can or should be,” which is “an impermissible basis for adverse employment actions.” In Zarda, a deceased skydiving instructor was allegedly fired for disclosing his sexual orientation to a client and not conforming to the “straight male macho stereotype.” More ›

The 12 days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 12 "Sexual Harassment Training Requirements Expanded for Farm Contractors"

December 23, 2017 by Mellissa A. Schafer

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2018. In the spirit of the season, we are using the next "12 days of the holidays" to blog about one California law a day and that law's impact on California employers. On the twelfth day of Christmas, my Labor and Employment attorney gave to me – twelve lords a leaping and SB 295. More ›

The 12 days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 4 "Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault and Stalking"

December 13, 2017 by Mellissa A. Schafer

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2018. In the spirit of the season, we are using the next "12 days of the holidays" to blog about one California law a day and that law's impact on California employers. On the fourth day of Christmas, my Labor and Employment attorney gave to me – four calling birds and AB 2337. More ›

The 12 days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 3 "Transgender Work Opportunity Act"

December 12, 2017 by Mellissa A. Schafer

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2018. In the spirit of the season, we are using the next "12 days of the holidays" to blog about one California law a day and that law's impact on California employers. On the Third Day of Christmas, my Labor and Employment attorney gave to me – three French hens and SB 396. More ›

Illinois Law Requires Quick Action on Sexual Harassment Policies for Units of Local Government

December 11, 2017 by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

In light of the recent spotlight in entertainment, government, media, and the law regarding unlawful harassment in the workplace, the Illinois legislature has recently taken action to ensure local governments have a handle on the problem. On November 16, 2017, the General Assembly passed Public Act 100-0554, which amends the Illinois State Officials and Employees Ethics Act and the Illinois Human Rights Act. The law prohibits sexual harassment and requires various state government and local governments to implement sexual harassment-related policies. More ›

Employee's Emotional Distress Claim Not Pre-empted but Not Actionable Emotional Distress Either

September 1, 2017 by Linda K. Horras

The United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit recently addressed whether common law tort claims arising during the employment relationship are pre-empted by the Illinois Human Rights Act simply because they share similar fact patterns to claims of discrimination or harassment in Richards v. U.S. Steel. The answer is no. More ›

Search

Subscribe via Email

RSSSubscribe via RSS
TwitterFollow us on Twitter

Blog Editors

Blog Contributors

Archives