In New York, if you’re fired for being too cute, your boss may be guilty of gender discrimination.

In a case where it sounds like we are hearing only half of the story, a yoga and massage therapist claimed that her chiropractor boss and his wife (who was the COO of the practice) fired her solely because of the wife’s unjustified suspicions that the chiropractor had the hots ...

Louise Davies is an Affirmative Action Paralegal in Constangy’s Winston-Salem, North Carolina, office. For more than 15 years, she has helped employers develop affirmative action plans and respond to audits and on-site investigations by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. She also conducts diversity training for employers. Louise is a graduate of Wesleyan College in Macon, Georgia.

In February 2016, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs filed an administrative complaint against B&H Foto, the largest non-chain photo and video equipment store in the United States. The Complaint alleged that B&H had discriminated against female, black, and Asian jobseekers by hiring only Hispanic men for entry-level positions.  The OFCCP also alleged that Hispanic employees were harassed, paid less than similarly situated workers, and denied promotions because of their ethnicity.

The agency and the company recently entered into a consent decree, in which B&H agreed to pay $3.22 million in back wages to more than 1,300 affected class members. The company has also agreed to hire a workplace consultant to address its employment practices and workplace conduct. In addition, the company must provide its managers with annual training on EEO principles and on workplace harassment.

By agreeing to the consent decree, the company did not admit any guilt or wrongdoing. The company released a statement denying all of the allegations, but recognizing that litigation would be costly and resolution would allow it to return to business “as usual” with the government.

NOTE FROM ROBIN: Last night, I posted briefly that the EEOC’s requirement, starting next March 31, that employers include compensation data in their annual EEO-1 reports had been suspended. We now have more information, and I have drafted a client bulletin that will go out this afternoon. Because the blog subscription and bulletin subscription lists are not identical, I’m ...

This just in, from Randel Johnson, Vice President of Labor, Immigration, and Employee Benefits at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce:

Members of the Chamber’s Labor Relations and Employee Benefits Committees:

We have just learned that the deadline for compliance with the new EEO-1 form reporting requirement for data on hours and compensation will be stayed indefinitely. According to our sources, [the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget] based their decision on two grounds, one of which was the appeal submitted by the Chamber that highlighted the new form’s problems with cost, utility, and confidentiality. [The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] will be publishing further details about what actions they will be taking and any future deadlines and timelines in the Federal Register.

This is a victory, not just for the business community, but for common sense in the world of regulations and information collection. As you know, the Chamber was at the forefront throughout the development of the revised form in crafting arguments opposing EEOC’s gross overreach in expanding the existing EEO-1 form to unmanageable proportions without any discernable benefit. . . .

We will provide more details on this important development as they become available.

Hopefully you’ll find this good news as the summer comes to an end!

I was not a fan of this new EEO-1 reporting requirement, so I am happy as a clam.

(You've been warned.)

As I reported Tuesday, a federal judge has ruled that the wellness regulations issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission are invalid. Judge John D. Bates of the District of Columbia did not vacate the rules but remanded them to the EEOC to address the rules' "failings." Now that I've had a chance to read the decision, I wanted to provide some ...

Is it national origin discrimination for your employer to remove you from a work assignment because your name is the same as that of a long-deceased Anglo-American who is currently out of favor?

Robert Lee, sports announcer for ESPN, is Asian-American and has no known ties to Gen. Robert E. Lee of Virginia. But it was "mutually agreed" that sports announcer Lee would be removed from ...

Patrick White, an attorney in the Cook County (Illinois) Public Defender’s Office, lost his claim that the county’s promotion process had an adverse impact on male attorneys. This judicial finding follows a jury verdict against the lawyer on his claims of disparate treatment discrimination.

Mr. White was a Grade III public defender, seeking a promotion to Grade IV. He contends ...

Bloomberg BNA reported last night that President Trump plans to nominate management-side labor attorney Peter Robb to become General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board, replacing Richard Griffin, whose term expires this fall.

Mr. Robb is a partner with the Vermont law firm Downs Rachlin Martin, PLLC. (I don't know Mr. Robb, but another (now former) Downs Rachlin attorney ...

I've written about the AARP's challenge to the wellness rules issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission here, here, and here.

Today, the court granted the AARP's motion for summary judgment and denied the EEOC's motion. I have not had a chance to read the opinion, but here it is. I'll be back soon with some real analysis.

Although the court has declared that the rules ...

If you're a private sector employer, you can generally fire an at-will employee for his or her political beliefs or expression. The First Amendment, as we discussed last week, does not limit you. Depending on where you are, there may be state or local laws protecting employees from discrimination based on their political beliefs or activities, but those jurisdictions are the ...

Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act). 
Continue Reading

Subscribe

Archives

Back to Page