Riddle me this:

Employee sues her boss for sexual harassment. Case settles for $127,500, and she has to agree to confidentiality and non-disparagement.

About nine years later, boss becomes an internet pariah for allegedly poaching a beautiful and beloved lion in Zimbabwe. Somebody in the media finds out about the sexual harassment settlement (how'd they do that, if it was ...

We went to the U.S. Supreme Court, and all I got was this lousy $45K?

(Better than a lousy t-shirt, I guess.)

Law360 reports that, now that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in the high-profile religious discrimination and accommodation case, Abercrombie has agreed to pay Samantha Elauf $25,670.53 in damages and $18,983.03 ...

As you may have seen, the jury in Marchuk v. Faruqi came back yesterday with a verdict for plaintiff Alexandra Marchuk, but it will not allow her to retire, nor will it even pay off her law school student loans.

Ms. Marchuk got a total of $140,000:

$70,000 in back pay

$20,000 in front pay

$5,000 in punitive damages against the law firm

and $45,000 in punitive damages against partner Juan ...

SCOTUSblog has the transcript of yesterday's oral argument in Mach Mining v. EEOC.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been on a tear this week, suing employers right and left, and getting some "wins" including a couple of big settlements . . .

Train-wreck boss. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas) vacated a summary judgment decision for a Tex-Mex restaurant franchisor that had been sued by the EEOC because ...

I've posted here and here about the lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Walgreen, which terminated a diabetic drug store employee for eating a bag of potato chips without immediately paying for them. The employee contended that she had to have the chips because her blood sugar was low, and she said she was unable to comply with the store's normal ...

An article by Lauren Weber and Rachel Feintzeig in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal caught a lot of attention -- it was about companies that have made the decision to do without a Human Resources function.

The idea drew some positive response on Twitter:

HR stifles innovation and bogs down businesses with inefficient policies and processes. http://t.co/5cGRIwHaxR

— Mike Brice ...

Employees who sue their employers and then settle -- can we talk?

Sometimes it's good to know what "the enemy" thinks. And, in relation to you, I am "the enemy" because I represent employers exclusively. However, some of my best friends are employees, and even though I'm on the other side, I hate to see employees shoot themselves in the feet. Especially when it's so easy to avoid doing so.