Despite what appeared to be clear evidence of bias by a job interviewer, employer escapes liability in discrimination claim.
This published decision gives failing grade to university officials who apparently need summer school to learn employment and defense best practices.
New Supreme Court ruling again emphasizes that filing EEOC charge is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to bringing a Title VII claim in federal court.
Unfortunately, for this public school employer, it’s “good deed” does not go unpunished, as evidenced by an employee’s civil rights claims brought in federal court.
Court allows class action case to proceed against Ford Motor over claim that company’s online job portal is too difficult for applicants with disabilities to navigate.
Rumor-based sexual harassment claim draws attention in the form of nearly 50 amicus curiae briefs from across the country. This post explains why.
Uninformed employer decisions in whistleblower actions among the most treacherous and difficult to defend in court.
Remaining flexible on religious accommodations could help employers stay off the naughty list with Michigan’s courts.
EEOC and Justice Department locked in clash of titans battle over discrimination protections for LGBTQ employees.
To avoid legal quagmires, employers must understand the differences between federal and Michigan law regarding employees claiming disabilities.
In a real game changer for employers and employees, a recent federal court ruling disavows application of the tender back rule to employment cases under Title VII and the Equal Pay Act.
State Civil Rights Commission expands scope to include sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination claims while U.S. Supreme Court rules in favor of baker in much-anticipated freedom of religion/expression case.
Appellate court rules Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects transgender employees from discrimination by employers in the workplace.
Appellate court forced to follow old precedent under Michigan wage law calls for conflict panel to re-examine that ruling.
Scheduling changes based on employer’s legitimate staffing concerns during upcoming leave of absence violated federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act.
Federal appellate court's ruling that Title VII prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation sets stage for showdown in U.S. Supreme Court.
Appellate court reverses lower court ruling based on same-actor defense in employment case involving direct evidence of discrimination.
The EEOC has issued a new Fact Sheet addressing bathroom access rights for transgender employees.
Check out the EEOC's new quick-read pamphlet for employers that provides helpful information and links to important Internet content.
Human resources must consider diversity within job classifications to help deter potential sex discrimination liability.
SubscribeRSS Plunkett Cooney LinkedIn Page Plunkett Cooney Twitter Page Plunkett Cooney Facebook Page
- Employment Liability
- Labor Law
- Wage & Hour
- Human Resources
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Unemployment Benefits
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Employment Discrimination
- OSHA Issues
- Employment Agreement
- Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Title VII
- Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)
- National Labor Relations Act
- Workplace Harassment
- Sick Leave
- Regulatory Law
- Workers' Compensation
- Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA)
- Minimum Wage
- National Labor Relations Board
- Transgender Issues
- Sexual Harassment
- Civil Rights
- Whistleblower Protection Act
- Non-compete Agreements
- Social Media
- Retail Liability
- Emergency Information
- Class Actions
- Business Risk Management
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA)
- Hostile Work Environment
- Department of Education (DOE)
- Tax Law
- Title IX
- Medical Marijuana
- Right to Work
- Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)
- Union Organizing & Relations
- One, Two, Three Strikes You’re OUT… When Dealing With Attendance Rules!
- Failure To Apply Duties Test Results in Ruling Against Employer in Wage Claim Appeal
- MIOSHA Suspends May 24 Rule, Makes COVID-19 Mitigation Measures Discretionary for Non-Health Care Employers
- ‘VACC To Normal’ Means Back to the Office for Michigan Starting May 24
- Michigan Pushes to Pandemic Finish Line by Promoting Double Vaccine Benefit
- Contractual Limitations Periods and Federal Civil Rights Claims
- Remote Work Still Required Amid Covid-19 Surge in Michigan
- DOL Opinion Letter Withdrawals Continue Under Biden Administration
- Worker’s Comp Coverage Would Have Been A Good Thing for This Employer
- Important COVID-19 Updates for Michigan Employers