Kollman & Saucier, Author at Kollman & Saucier P.A.

Employee Can’t Prove Supervisor’s “Black Ass” Remark Motivated His Termination

Kollman & Saucier

07/17/2019

In a recent unpublished decision, the Eleventh Circuit held that an African-American former employee could not get past summary judgment on his Title VII and Section 1981 race discrimination claims. Williams v. Housing Opportunities for Persons with Exceptionalities, No. 2:17-cv-00468-ACA (11th Cir. 7/15/19). Williams worked as a direct care provider for Housing Opportunities for Persons with Exceptionalities (“HOPE”). He worked...

Kollman & Saucier

07/12/2019

Gender Identity, Sexual Harassment

Although the Supreme Court has yet to opine on the issue, many jurisdictions interpret Title VII as encompassing discrimination because of gender identity (and/or sexual orientation) as discrimination because of sex. Such was the case for a former transgender corrections officer for the Arizona Department of Corrections (“ADOC”). John Doe v. State of Arizona, No. CV-18-00384-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz. 7/8/19). Mr. John Doe, a transgender male,...

Kollman & Saucier

07/11/2019

Employment Discrimination, Gender Identity, Legal Developments, Sex Discrimination, State Law

Watching the U.S. Women’s National Team play in and win the World Cup this past weekend took me right back to my own days of competitive girls’ soccer. But nostalgia wasn’t the only thing that came to mind as the win brought additional attention to the Team’s recent lawsuit for equal pay. That lawsuit, filed in March, generally alleges that the players on the Women’s National Team (“WNT”) are paid less than the players on...

Kollman & Saucier

07/09/2019

First Amendment Protections, Workers' Compensation

I read frequently about legal opinions interpreting various laws governing the employer-employee relationship. Less often, I encounter one concerning the employment lawyer-client relationship. So when I came across a recent case, Bevan & Associates, LPA, Inc., et al. v Yost, et al., No. 18-3262 (6th Cir. 7/8/19), in which the Sixth Circuit discussed the constitutionality of a state law banning solicitation of workers’ compensation...

Kollman & Saucier

07/08/2019

Legislative Developments, Race Discrimination, Reasonable Accommodations/Undue Burden

This past week marked not only the anniversary of our Independence Day, but also the 55th anniversary of the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Amidst this well-deserved fanfare, California became the first state to make hairstyle a protected status under its state anti-discrimination law, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Presently, employers who take actions based on an individual’s headwear, when worn for religious reasons...

Kollman & Saucier

05/22/2019

FMLA

Another “head-shaker” case from FMLA land. Section 825.303(a) of the DOL’s regulations on requesting FMLA leave provides that when an unforeseen need for FMLA leave arises, “an employee must provide notice to the employer as soon as practicable . . . within the time prescribed by the employer's usual and customary notice requirements applicable to such leave." 29 C.F.R. § 825.303(a) (emphasis added). But what happens when the employer has...

Kollman & Saucier

05/20/2019

Employer Liability, FMLA

I have been updating my book on the FMLA/Wage & Hour Law (available through LexisNexis). But enough gratuitous self-promotion. The point is that in doing so I get to read a whole mess of recent FMLA decisions. A few of them make me shake my head at the decision-making skills of some members of our species. I share one of those with you, dear reader. It would seem self-evident, but employers sometimes forget that the concept of leave...

Kollman & Saucier

05/10/2019

Employment Discrimination, Independent Contractors

To build on my colleague Vince Jackson’s recent post about the Department of Labor’s distinction between independent contractors and employees, teasing out whether an individual is (or was) a company’s employee who is generally covered by equal employment opportunity laws, or an independent contractor who is not covered, is an often difficult but critically important issue in handling employment litigation. This week, a federal court of...

Kollman & Saucier

04/26/2019

Pretext, Race Discrimination, Retaliation

To prevail in an employment discrimination case, the plaintiff is required to present evidence of pretext by his or her (former) employer. What exactly does pretext mean, though, at a practical level? The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently explored this concept in holding that a former trash truck driver was entitled to go to trial based on sufficient evidence that his former employer’s proffered reason for terminating him was a...

Kollman & Saucier

04/24/2019

Sexual Orientation, Supreme Court Decisions

On April 22, 2019, the Supreme Court granted certiorariin three cases relating to Title VII’s coverage (or noncoverage) of workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or transgender status. Those cases are Bostock v. Clayton County, GA(No. 17-1618), Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda(No. 17-1623), and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC (No. 18-107). The Court consolidated Bostockand Zarda, which both concern whether...

< 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 … 34 >

Email Updates

Employee Can’t Prove Supervisor’s “Black Ass” Remark Motivated His Termination

Transgender Employee Succeeds on Hostile Work Environment Claim

Maryland’s Equal Pay Law: Are You In Compliance?

Sixth Circuit Strikes Down Workers’ Compensation Claimant Solicitation Law

New California Law Adds Protected Status Based On Hairstyle

Follow The Company Rule To Request FMLA. No, The Other One.

Requiring Employee to Work While on FMLA: Bad idea. Duh.

Surgeon Is Not Hospital Employee For Title VII Purposes, Seventh Circuit Holds

Fourth Circuit Holds That Employer’s Shifting Story Is Evidence Of Pretext

Supreme Court Grants Certiorari On LGBT Discrimination Issues

Email Updates

Email Updates

Author: Kollman & Saucier

Email Updates