Two recent court decisions considered whether employees who had permanent lifting restrictions were “qualified individuals” entitled to relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Since 1974 – just 10 years after Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed – Congress has made repeated attempts to introduce and pass legislation that would have amended the landmark Act to prohibit discrimination in hiring and employment on the basis of sexual orientation. The latest bill to make its […]
Almost 40 years ago now, a young mother had the courage to give me up for adoption to my parents who could not themselves have children. All of my life, I have reaped the almost-unbelievable benefits of my biological mother’s courage and my parents’ love – and so does my family now. Yet, my adoption […]
From time to time, employers discharge employees because they’re “not a good fit” or “not a team player.” While these may be perfectly good reasons for ending someone’s employment, be aware that in some situations courts or jurors may believe the employer is using that explanation as a way to conceal a discriminatory motive.
In recent years, companies and organizations designated as “applicable large employers” under the Affordable Care Act have had to focus much of their attention on understanding and complying with the ACA’s complex “play-or-pay” rules, which — starting next year — generally give employers a choice between offering full-time employees and their dependents health coverage or paying certain penalties.
Car dealerships must be a Mecca for pranks. The combination of substantial periods of downtime with a lively sales staff leads to workplace fun. But what happens when things turn ugly, and someone gets hurt? Does the employer bear any responsibility?
Recently, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision in Barrett v. Salt Lake County that emphasized the importance of not retaliating against employees who engage in protected conduct.