Last week, I posted about the Supreme Court's decision in Vance v. Ball State, a nice win for employers. Here's another: University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, in which the Court held that a plaintiff seeking to get to a jury on a retaliation claim has to meet an exacting standard of proof.

What the case was about

The plaintiff, Dr. Nassar, was a physician of Middle ...

In honor of our nation's 237th birthday (she doesn't look a day over 236, IMO), I'll be off Friday and hope you will be, too. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has given employers two victories that will make you want to have a beer and shoot off some Roman candles from the back porch. Here's the scoop on one of the decisions -- Vance v. Ball State University, in which the Court took a narrow ...

UPDATE (7/2/13): As promised last week, here is a link to a bulletin on the Windsor decision and its effects on all types of benefits programs by Brian Magargle in our firm's Columbia, SC, office.

This week's Supreme Court decision in United States v. Windsor, striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act as unconstitutional, should simplify administration of spousal leave ...

Five quick takes this week (and I do mean quick) because my family reunion is this weekend.

I never thought deep-frying macaroni and cheese demonstrated particularly good judgment . . .  Paula Deen needs to button her lip. Here is the National Enquirer blurb that broke the story. And here is the full transcript of her actual deposition testimony.

Should customer bullying be a component of ...

If you fire an employee for an indefensible reason, chances are you will get a charge or a lawsuit out of it, even if the indefensible reason was legal. That's HR/Legal 101. (In other words, don't believe that "employment at will" propaganda.)

If you realize your reason wasn't too good and therefore "improve" it a little after the fact, that just makes things worse. If you "improve" it ...

Mother's Day is long past, but you'd never know it -- in employment law, this has been the Week of the Moms. Here's a roundup - tell us what you think!

First up: Title VII's ban on pregnancy discrimination includes discrimination based on lactation or the need to express milk. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit* has held in a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity ...

How much do you really know about the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act? Here's a quick quiz:

Which of the following is an unlawful request for "genetic information"?

1. "Our company requires a post-offer, pre-employment medical examination that includes a complete genotype. We will need to verify that you have all 46 chromosomes but no extras. And any mutations will ...

NOTE TO READERS (7/18/15): Due to a technical issue with the comments, replies that I tried to make to a number of commenters did not "post." I apologize. I think we have everything fixed now, and I've gone back in this morning and replied to just about everybody unless the comment did not seek a response or I couldn't understand the comment. My responses are under the name "InsiderBlog ...

Last week's post about whether certain employees in the news deserved to be fired, in addition to generating some great comments from readers, got me thinking about firings in general.

I don't like to fire people. 

And I know what you're thinking -- then why in the world is she even an employment lawyer!?! She needs a new career! I know. I've fired a few people myself. And, of course ...

Andy Warhol said that in the future everyone would be world-famous for 15 minutes. Wouldn't you hate for your 15 minutes of fame to be from getting fired from your job? Or having everybody on the Internet cyber-shouting for your employer to fire you?

Here are a few people whose 15 minutes came from an employment termination or calls for their termination. What do you think? Is termination ...