Announcing Kollman, Saucier & Jackson, P.A. and our relocation to Hunt Valley Read More
Email Updates

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

Law School Has Right To Decide The Qualifications It Wants In Its Professors

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
07/02/2013
Age Discrimination, Employment Discrimination, Public Sector Employment Law
Earlier this year, the Court of Specials Appeals found in favor of the University of Baltimore School of Law (UB) in an age discrimination suit brought by Donald Dobkin.  Dobkin v. Univ. of Balt. Sch. of Law, 210 Md. App. 580 (2013). In 2009, Dobkin applied to become a professor at the University.  Instead of hiring the then 56-year-old Dobkin (or hundreds of other applicants), UB hired a 32-year-old female for the position.  Dobkin then sued the...
read more

The Supreme Court Speaks: Title VII "Supervisors" Must Have The Power To Implement Tangible Employment Actions

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/28/2013
Employer Liability, Employment Discrimination, Supreme Court Decisions
In Vance v. Ball State University, in a 5-4 decision issued June 24, 2013, on the same day and by the same majority that decided the Nassar case limiting Title VII retaliation claims to “but for” violations, the U.S. Supreme Court handed employers another victory by defining, precisely and narrowly, who is a “supervisor” for liability purposes in cases of Title VII unlawful harassment. Under Title VII, employer liability for harassment...
read more

Supreme Court Strikes Down Portion Of Defense Of Marriage Act

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/28/2013
Legal Developments, Supreme Court Decisions
In an important and far-reaching decision, the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307, 570 U.S. ____ (June 26, 2013).  Section III of DOMA defined marriage, for federal purposes, as only between a man and woman.  By striking down this provision, and recognizing the respective states’ definitions of marriage, the Supreme Court opened the door to a panoply of federal...
read more

Race Based Admissions Program Sent Back To Lower Courts

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/28/2013
Supreme Court Decisions
The Supreme Court recently made it a bit more difficult for state universities to utilize race as one of the factors in their undergraduate admission processes. In Fisher v. The University of Texas at Austin, et al., No. 11-345, decided June 24, 2013, the Supreme Court effectively punted on the broader issue of whether using race as one of many factors is permissible under the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Constitution.  Instead,...
read more

What's Old is New: Alcohol in the Workplace

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/27/2013
Legal Developments
During the go-go days of the dot-com boom, I marveled at some of the perks my clients were providing to employees.  Video games and foosball tables; on-site auto detailing; and the biggest shocker to me: open bars at work.  One client used the phrase "going to the opera" to describe its regular company-sponsored outings to the local watering holes. But then came the dot-com crash, and I thought these days were forever behind me. As a management...
read more

Supreme Court Holds That “But-For” Standard Applies In Title VII Retaliation Cases

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/25/2013
Retaliation, Supreme Court Decisions
In one of the biggest employment cases this year, in a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court  held that the mixed-motive theory under employment discrimination laws cannot be used in retaliation claims. Univ. of Texas Sw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 4704 (June 24, 2013).   In Nassar, the Court addressed the federal circuit split that has developed following its 2009 decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Servs. Inc., 557 U.S. 168 (2009). A little...
read more

Passive Aggressive Disorder Not A Covered Disability

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/20/2013
Disability & Leave, Reasonable Accommodations/Undue Burden
A California federal district court has held that “passive-aggressive disorder” is not a disability under California’s anti-discrimination law,  a statute that defines disability more broadly than does the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA).  Gliha v. Butte-Glenn Cmty. Coll. Dist,  2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84266 (E.D. Cal. June 14, 2013). Gliha had been the executive director of development at the Community College for...
read more

Fourth Circuit Tosses NLRB’s “Worker Rights” Posting Requirement

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/18/2013
Agency Activity, Labor Law
The Fourth Circuit has agreed with the D.C. Circuit that the National Labor Relations Board exceeded its authority by promulgating a 2011 regulation that required employers to post a notice on worker rights in its recent decision in Chamber of Commerce v. NLRB, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 12034 (4th Cir. June 14, 2013).  This decision affirmed the district court's opinion that the National Labor Relations Act does not authorize or empower the Board to...
read more

NLRB Judge Strikes Down Confidentiality Policy

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/12/2013
Labor Law
Over the past year, we’ve seen a lot of NLRB rulings and guidance limiting the rights of employers to regulate non-union employees. While social media rulings have drawn most of the attention, the Board has also tried to limit employers’ rights to issue work rules, maintain the confidentiality of workplace investigations, and  make employees aware of the at-will nature of their employment relationship.  On June 4, 2013, an NLRB Administrative...
read more

10th Circuit Affirms SOX Whistleblower Ruling

Kollman, Saucier, & Jackson
06/08/2013
Retaliation, Whistleblowers
On June 4, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit affirmed a ruling by the United States Department of Labor's Administrative  Review Board and held that Lockheed Martin violated the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”) by constructively discharging an employee after she complained about an executive who allegedly had sexual affairs with soldiers she met through the company's pen-pal program.  Lockheed Martin Corp. v. ARB, 10th Cir...
read more
Email Updates

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