Email Updates

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

20-Day Window Too Short A Time To File Internal Complaint Of Discrimination

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
05/08/2013
Arbitration, Employment Discrimination
Quality Restaurant Concepts, LLC (perhaps better known as Applebee’s), maintains an internal dispute resolution (IDR) process and an Employment Arbitration Policy.  The company’s arbitration policy covers Title VII claims, and the IDR policy set a 20-day deadline for employees to pursue claims of discrimination.  Under the arbitration policy, Applebee’s employees are required to complete the IDR process before participating in arbitration. ...
read more

Maryland Judge Dismisses Discrimination and Retaliation Claims

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
05/06/2013
Employment Discrimination, Retaliation
On May 1, 2013, Maryland’s newest federal judge, George Levi Russell, III, dismissed a lawsuit filed by a former employee of a kidney dialysis clinic near Baltimore.  In Ezeh v. Bio-Med. Applications of Md., No. 11-3411 (D. Md. 2013), Judge Russell granted summary judgment to the employer and dismissed plaintiff’s claims of retaliation and race and national origin discrimination. The plaintiff, Perpetua Ezeh, is of Nigerian descent and worked...
read more

Stray Remark Overturns Summary Judgment in D.C. Circuit

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
04/15/2013
Employment Discrimination
Generally speaking, in order to state a claim for a hostile work environment claim, the employee must demonstrate conduct that creates an “objective hostile or abuse work environment.”  Ordinarily, this requires demonstrating that the workplace is “permeated with discriminatory intimidations, ridicule and insults” to the point that it is so severe and pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment.  Isolated racial...
read more

No Employer Liability For Sexual Harassment If Employee Doesn’t Complain About Sex-Based Conduct

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
04/12/2013
Employment Discrimination, Retaliation, Sexual Harassment
A federal appeals court recently held that an employer was not liable for sexual harassment to an employee who complained only about harassment, not sex-based harassment.  Medina-Rivera v. MVM Inc., No. 11-2419 (1st Cir. April 10, 2013). In 2008, Estrella Medina-Rivera worked as a part-time detention officer for MVM, Inc., a security company in Puerto Rico.  In October 2008, Medina complained to her supervisor that an unnamed federal agent with...
read more

Employer’s Consistent Explanation for Discharging Employee Defeats Discrimination Claims

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
04/11/2013
Disability & Leave, Employment Discrimination, FMLA, Reasonable Accommodations/Undue Burden, Retaliation, State Law
In Anderson v. Discovery Communications, 8:08-cv-02424, 2013 WL 1364345 (4th Cir. Apr. 5, 2013), the Fourth Circuit affirmed a decision from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland granting summary judgment to Discovery and a cadre of individual defendants on claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Montgomery County Human Rights Act (MCHRA), and Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Though unremarkable in and of...
read more

Fourth Circuit Limits Scope of EEOC Charge

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/20/2013
Employment Discrimination, Litigation, Sexual Harassment
Under Title VII, an employee suing for discrimination or retaliation must first file an administrative charge of discrimination with the EEOC or a state or local fair employment practices agency.  The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that the employer is put on notice of the allegations, and that the administrative agency is given a chance to investigate, before an employee pursues the case in court.  Because of this requirement, one issue...
read more

New Federal Guidelines for Federal Contractors and Subcontractors in Considering Criminal Records

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/13/2013
Agency Activity, Employment Discrimination
On January 29, 2013, the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (“OFCCP”) issued Directive 306, “Complying with Nondiscrimination Provisions: Criminal Record Restrictions and Discrimination Based on Race and National Origin.”  Effective upon its issuance, Directive 306 applies to all covered federal contractors and subcontractors, and requires contractors to carefully tailor the use of an applicant’s...
read more

Former Virginia Tech Employees’ Title VII and Equal Pay Act Claims Remain Viable

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/06/2013
Employment Discrimination, Retaliation
The Fourth Circuit recently issued an opinion addressing employment discrimination allegations raised by three former female employees of Virginia Tech University.  In Maron v. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, No. 12-1146 (4th Cir. Jan. 31, 2013) (unpublished), the plaintiffs claimed that Virginia Tech violated the Equal Pay Act (EPA) when the University paid female employees less than males employees performing the same work. ...
read more

Timeliness of Title VII Action to be Decided by the Jury

Darrell VanDeusen
Darrell VanDeusen
12/03/2012
Employment Discrimination, Litigation
I love to read Judge Richard Posner’s opinions and agree with most of them.  He is probably the most significant non-Supreme Court Justice in the country. But a recent decision of his from the Seventh Circuit leaves me contemplating the potential for abuse by crafty plaintiffs.   In Begolli v Home Depot, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 24546 (7th Cir. November 29, 2012), the court returned a pro se plaintiff’s case to the district court for a trial on...
read more

Supreme Court to Revisit Faragher/Ellerth Defense to Harassment Claims

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
11/21/2012
Employment Discrimination, Litigation, Sexual Harassment
Soon after Thanksgiving, next Monday in fact, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument on a case of immense importance to employers, employees, and the employment law community.  In Vance v. Ball State University, the Court will address the question of who is a “supervisor” in the context of harassment cases under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Like the debate at Thanksgiving dinner over whose stuffing is better, there is a circuit...
read more
Email Updates

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