Earlier this week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in three soon-to-be landmark cases concerning LGBTQ rights under Title VII: Bostock v. Clayton County (No. 17-1618); Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda (No. 17-1623); and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. EEOC (18-107). Bostock and Zarda concern whether sexual orientation is protected under Title […]
Supreme Court Decisions
Gender Identity Bias and Employer Dress Codes
By Frank Kollman on October 2, 2019 in Employment Discrimination, Gender Identity, Supreme Court Decisions
On October 8, the Supreme Court will hear arguments whether gender identity is a protected classification under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, in addition to sex, race, color, religion, and national origin. R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al., No. 18-107. Whatever the Court decides, its […]
Supreme Court Holds That Title VII’s Charge-Filing Requirement Is Not Jurisdictional
By Garrett Wozniak on June 3, 2019 in Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies, Supreme Court Decisions
The Supreme Court held today in a unanimous opinion that the charge-filing requirement in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not jurisdictional. Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, No. 18-525 (June 3, 2019). Title VII prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, as well […]
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari On LGBT Discrimination Issues
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 […]
Supreme Court to Decide if EEOC Charge Filing is Jurisdictional or Administrative
The Supreme Court has granted a writ certiorari to address the question of whether Title VII’s requirement of the need to file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) before going to court is a jurisdictional or administrative exhaustion requirement. The case comes from the Fifth Circuit and has been bouncing around the lower […]
Supreme Court Rules That Public Sector Agency Fees Are Unconstitutional
By Eric Paltell on June 27, 2018 in Labor Law, Public Sector Employment Law, Supreme Court Decisions
On the last opinion day of the 2017-2018 term, the Supreme Court issued a long-expected decision prohibiting public sector collective bargaining agreements from requiring employees who are not members of the union to pay agency fees. In a 5-4 decision written by Justice Alito, the Court overturned 41 year old precedent and ruled that requiring […]
Uber Driver Must Ride Solo: Class Action Waiver Enforced Post Epic Systems
On May 21, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, which we previously discussed at length. That case, which upheld class action waivers in favor of individual arbitration, forces Gustavo Camilo to individually arbitrate his claim that Uber illegally charged him and other drivers a workers’ compensation fee. Just a […]
Supreme Court Dodges Sticky Issues in Same-Sex Wedding Cake Case
By Randi Klein Hyatt on June 6, 2018 in Employment Discrimination, Same-Sex Marriage, Sexual Orientation, Supreme Court Decisions
Both sides of the political divide had been eagerly awaiting the decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission. The Supreme Court’s decision, however, largely left the central issue of the case unresolved. This case involves a Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple in 2012 because […]
No Overtime This Time… Supreme Court Holds Service Advisors Are Exempt Under The FLSA
On April 2, 2018, the Supreme Court, with its second consideration of the same case, held in a 5-4 decision, that automobile service advisors are exempt from overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, the Supreme Court held that service advisers fall under the FLSA exemption applicable to “any […]
Class Actions, Collective Bargaining and a Colorado Cakeshop: Why The Supreme Court’s Fall Term Matters for Employers
The 2017-2018 Supreme Court term could be a very significant one for employment law. With a newly constituted conservative majority, the Court is poised to decide three cases that will likely have far-reaching implications on public sector collective bargaining, class action litigation, and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Are Class Action Waivers in […]
Contact
Kollman & Saucier, P.A.
1823 York Road
The Business Law Building
Timonium, Maryland 21093- Tel: (410) 727-4300
- Fax: (410) 727-4391
- Email: info@kollmanlaw.com
- Jo Ann Strong, Office Manager
