This One’s For The Dogs

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
07/06/2016
An employer can prevail at the summary judgment stage by demonstrating legitimate, non-discriminatory, and non-pretextual reasons for an employment decision.  That is the lesson of DeWalt v. Harrison Cty. Comm’rs, No. 15-4189 (6th Cir., June 30, 2016), a case involving dog wardens, a stolen radio, and local politics. Tina DeWalt worked as a dog warden for the Board of Commissioners of Harrison County, Ohio until the Board abolished her position...
read more

EEOC Settles One of its First Sexual Orientation Lawsuits

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
06/28/2016
On June 23, 2016, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and IFCO Systems settled for about $200,000  a Title VII case involving a lesbian work lift worker who alleged she was harassed and discriminated against based on her sexual orientation.  The case was  one of the first lawsuits filed by the EEOC alleging that a private employer violated Title VII  by treating an employee differently because of their sexual orientation. In EEOC v....
read more

Maryland Significantly Changes Pay Discrimination Law with Equal Pay for Equal Work Act of 2016

On May 19, Governor Hogan signed into law the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act of 2016.  The law, which takes effect on October 1, 2016, amends the state’s existing wage discrimination law in several significant ways. Changes that Protect Employees There are several notable changes in the amendment that give broader protections to employees, including: Prohibiting pay discrimination because of gender identity.  LGBT employees are now explicitly...
read more

Inadequate Conciliation? EEOC May Have to Foot the Bill, Says Supreme Court

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
06/01/2016
The United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the EEOC may be ordered to pay an employer’s attorney’s fees if it fails to satisfy the conciliation requirement of Title VII.  In CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC, No. 14-1375 (May 19, 2016), the Court held that a favorable ruling on the merits of a claim is not required for an employer to be considered a “prevailing party” that may seek legal fees.  The opinion expands Mach Mining v....
read more

The Supreme Court Delivers Some Bad News To The Post Office

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Green v. Brennan, U.S. No. 14-613 (May 23, 2016), holding that the statute of limitations for a former Postmaster's Title VII constructive discharge claim begins on the date he gave notice of his resignation, and not on the date of the employer's alleged last discriminatory act. Former Postmaster Marvin Green had 45-days, under the limitations period applicable to federal sector Title VII claims,...
read more

DOL and EEOC Weigh In On Title VII and Bathroom Restriction Laws

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
05/06/2016
Earlier this week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued a fact sheet titled “Bathroom Access Rights for Transgender Employees Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”  Yesterday, the Department of Justice sent a letter to North Carolina’s governor stating that his state’s H.B. 2 -- legislation which requires individuals to use public restrooms associated with their gender at birth -- violates Title VII of the Civil...
read more

EEOC Has Right to Investigate Charge Filed by Undocumented Worker

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
04/26/2016
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has ruled that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") has the right to investigate a charge of discrimination filed by an employee who was not legally authorized to work in the United States. EEOC v. Maritime Autowash, Inc., 4th Cir No. 15-1947 (April 25, 2016).  Although the Court found the Commission may investigate the claims, it did not resolve the broader question of...
read more

Lack of Experience Sinks Case for Wanna-Be Female Football Coach

Darrell VanDeusen
Darrell VanDeusen
04/21/2016
How can you get experience for a job if you can’t get a job to get you the experience? That was at least a part the problem for Sue Ann Easterling, according to a federal court judge in Louisiana last week.   Easterling applied for a job as a high school head football coach in Tensas Parish.  When she was not selected for the job she sued the School Board, alleging sex discrimination and retaliation because she was perceived as a litigious...
read more

Appellate Court Rules That Obesity is Not a Disability Under the ADA

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
04/08/2016
It’s no secret that there is an obesity epidemic in America.  According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), more than 1 in 3 adults (78.6 million total) are now obese.  In addition to its adverse effects on health and lifestyle, obesity also imposes tremendous financial costs: it is estimated that the average obese person incurs $1,429 more in medical costs each year than those who are of “normal” weight (BMI between 18-24.9), with a...
read more

Fourth Circuit Applies More Stringent "But For" Standard in ADA Cases

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/09/2016
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has ruled that a plaintiff asserting a disability discrimination claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") must show that her disability was the “but for” cause of her termination. Gentry v. East West Partners Club Mgmt. Co., Inc., No. 14-2382 (4th Cir., March 4, 2016). In upholding a “but for” jury instruction, the Fourth Circuit held that this heightened causation...
read more
Email Updates

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Loading