Religious accommodation, the Oscars, non-competes, social media, Brian Williams versus Bill O'Reilly, workplace violence, and inspirational employees -- we have it all today! Here are some links about recent news and court cases involving the workplace, followed by some points for discussion if you'd like to comment.

Supreme Court justices seem to side with hijab-wearer ...

Last October, I posted about a consent decree entered into between Wal-Mart and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, in which Wal-Mart agreed to pay $72,500 to candidate for a store job in Maryland whose offer was withdrawn because she couldn’t undergo a urine test for drugs.

The candidate had end-stage renal disease.

Now, Kmart has been hit, too, in a case involving almost ...

Laura Jones was offered a sales job at the Wal-Mart store in Cockeysville, Maryland, and was told that she would have to take a drug test. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Ms. Jones told an assistant store manager that she had end stage renal cancer, which prevented her from taking a urine test. The EEOC says that Jones then went to the drug testing collection ...

Last week, I wrote about the two situations in which an employer should ask an applicant about a disability or a religious belief or practice that might require reasonable accommodation. (As I emphasized last week, 99 percent of the time, you should stay away from these topics in job interviews.) My post prompted one reader to ask some follow-up questions that I think are worthy of another ...

Everybody knows that an employer should never, ever, ever ask an applicant about religion or disability until after a conditional offer of employment has been made. And maybe not even then. Right?

Right?

Well, mostly right. But, as a couple of EEOC lawsuits show, there may be times when you have to make an exception to this rule. (Otherwise, it would be too easy for employers to stay out of ...

Law 360 reports this morning that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has agreed to rehear the EEOC v. Ford Motor Co. case, which I reported on (and disagreed with) in April. The original decision, holding that Ford should have allowed an employee with severe and unpredictable irritable bowel syndrome to telecommute as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with ...

As promised on Monday, here is my magnum opus regarding the EEOC's new Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Issues. (Next week, I'll try to get back to spurious sexual harassment lawsuits against Yahoo executives and gift cards to employees who don't go to the bathroom during the work day . . . all that really important stuff.)

This past Monday, July 14, a divided ...

What do you really know about the "interactive process" under the Americans with Disabilities Act? This is one area in which I am always getting questions, and I think it's the terminology that scares employers. "Interactive process" sounds so intimidating.

Instead of "interactive process," it should be called "sit-down."

When an individual needs a reasonable accommodation, the ...

Thanks very much to Colin O'Keefe of LXBN-TV for interviewing me yesterday on the EEOC v. Ford Motor Company case that I posted about last Friday. This is the case in which a panel of the Sixth Circuit said that Ford had to offer telecommuting to an employee as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. I was not quite on board with the court's decision ...

The EEOC -- can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.

As irritated as I sometimes become with the agency's lawsuits, I have to hand it to them. The guidance they have recently published jointly with the Federal Trade Commission on background checks is great -- written in plain English (no legalese), concise, and convenient. An employer can read and comprehend it without even needing an ...