Second Circuit Holds Sexual Orientation Not Protected By Title VII

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/28/2017
In a case that has been closely watched, in Christiansen v. Omnicorp Grp., Inc., No. 16-749 (2d Cir. March 27, 2017), a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit decided that a gay, HIV-positive employee is not able to pursue a claim of sexual orientation discrimination under Title VII, concluding that Title VII does not protect against gay bias.  The Second Circuit cut to the case and concluded that absent a ruling by the Supreme Court, or a full...
read more

Social Media Strikes Again

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/24/2017
Here is another tale of social media posts and “likes” getting an employee into hot water.  Again, the culprit is Facebook.  In Grutzmacher, et al. v. Howard County, et al., No. 15-2066, (4th Cir. March 20, 2017), the plaintiffs were a former Howard County, Maryland, Battalion Chief with the Maryland Department of Fire and Rescue Services (“Department”), and a County volunteer paramedic.  While the Court’s opinion sets forth the...
read more

If At First You Don’t Succeed, Try Again

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/22/2017
Readers of this blog are probably familiar with how the appellate court system works.  A party appeals a judge’s factual ruling to an appellate court, which then reviews the lower court’s decision.  Appeals from federal trial courts and federal regulatory boards are usually heard by that circuit’s court of appeal (i.e. the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit). Appeals from the federal appellate courts’ three judge panels...
read more

Maryland Legislative Update

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/17/2017
There is a little over a month left before the Maryland General Assembly adjourns its 2017 legislative session.  Below is a list of some of the employment-related bills that thelegislature is considering or has considered. House Bill 1, the Maryland Healthy Working Families Act, was summarized in a previous blog post.  HB 1 has passed the House and is being considered by the Senate.  HB 1 was cross-filed with Senate Bill 230, which the Senate...
read more

Employer’s Inconsistent Explanations Permits Claim To Survive Summary Judgment

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/15/2017
A recent decision out of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, Caldwell v. KHOU-TV, No. 16-20408 (5th Cir. March 6, 2017), offers an obvious, but important, reminder for employers -- provide consistent reasons for why you make employment decisions.  Be honest.  Be consistent.  Don’t make stuff up.  Otherwise, plaintiff-employees may be able to assail your explanation when and if litigation ensues.  In Caldwell, the plaintiff claimed that he was...
read more

Virginia Supreme Court Affirms Dismissal of Bowman Claim Based on Protective Order Statutes

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
03/08/2017
On February 23, 2017, the Virginia Supreme Court sustained a demurrer to a complaint alleging a Bowman claim of wrongful termination.  Francis v. National Accrediting Commission of Career Arts & Sciences, Inc. No. 160267.  The Court rejected an employee's claims that the public policy embodied in Virginia Code §§ 19.2-152.7:1 through 19.2-152.10 (the Protective Order Statutes) provides the basis for a wrongful discharge claim. According to...
read more

Virginia Court Strikes Down Homebuilder's Non-Compete Agreement

On February 14, 2017, a federal judge denied a home builders’ motion for a preliminary injunction to stop a former employee covered by a non-compete agreement from working for a competing builder.  Applying Virginia law, Judge Liam O’Grady of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, ruled that the geographic scope of the non-compete was overbroad and, therefore, the agreement was invalid.  NVR,...
read more

Non-Renewal of Contract or Termination?

Employers often think that not renewing an employee’s contract is somehow qualitatively different from a termination of employment.  In some cases, and in certain limited circumstances, that may be true.  It is not true, however, with regard to statutory retaliation claims (e.g., my contract was not renewed because I engaged in activity protected by Title VII, the ADA, the FLSA, or some other statute containing anti-retaliation provisions).  In...
read more

Split Developing On ADEA Disparate Impact Claims

A federal judge in California recently ruled that PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLC (“PwC”) must defend against a class action claim of unintentional age discrimination.  Rabin v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, No. 16-cv-02276-JST (N.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2017). On April 17, 2016, Steve Rabin, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated unsuccessful job applicants, filed a putative class action alleging that PwC maintains hiring policies and other...
read more

Trump Nominates Acosta to Head Department of Labor

Kollman & Saucier
Kollman & Saucier
02/17/2017
As readers of this blog may be aware, in yesterday's post, I called attention to the fact that there was no replacement pick lined up for the Secretary of Labor.  Less than twenty-four hours after Andrew Puzder’s decision to withdraw his nomination, President Trump selected R. Alexander “Alex” Acosta to head the DOL.  If confirmed, Acosta would be the first Hispanic member of the current Cabinet.  (For anyone wondering, Alex Acosta is not...
read more
Email Updates

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

Loading