• The HR Specialist - Print Newsletter
  • HR Specialist: Employment Law
  • The HR Weekly

Discrimination / Harassment

EEOC persuades court that lactation discrimination is gender bias

06/27/2013
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in Houston has ruled unanimously that firing a woman because she is lactating is unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII.

Racism, bias allegations roil Texas Parks and Wildlife

06/26/2013
A black game warden-in-training—one of only two black cadets in her class—has filed an EEOC discrimination complaint against the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. At the same time, the EEOC also granted a white game warden permission to file a federal lawsuit alleging that supervisors instructed him to “distance himself” from black colleagues.

Court: True volunteers aren’t covered by Title VII

06/26/2013
Except under very limited circumstances, volunteers aren’t considered employees under Title VII. That means they can’t sue for things like sexual harassment.

Even innocent age-related comments can trigger a bias lawsuit

06/26/2013
Here’s something to add to your regular training sessions for managers and supervisors. Warn them against making age-related comments. These can backfire, even if they aren’t intended to be ageist or demeaning to anyone.

Court rules firing based on lactation is sex discrimination under Title VII, PDA

06/26/2013
The EEOC has won a major case in its ongoing efforts to help lactating women who want to return to work. The 5th Circuit has accepted the commission’s interpretation that firing a woman who needs a place to express milk at work is both sex discrimination under Title VII and violates the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) because lactation is related to pregnancy.

Court: Vague EEOC complaint isn’t protected

06/26/2013
By now, you no doubt understand the dangers of retaliating against someone who has filed an EEOC discrimination complaint. Some workers think all it takes to stop legitimate discipline is to file with the agency. But courts are losing patience with workers who use this tactic.

Fair investigation all that’s needed to support discharge

06/24/2013
Employers don’t have to be absolutely right before disciplining an employee. They merely have to investigate first.

How risky is it to fire a pregnant employee having attendance problems?

06/20/2013
Q. An employee has been with us for less than a year, so she isn’t yet eligible for FMLA leave. Last month she missed five days because her child had a high fever. She used available PTO for the time off. Last week, she was no-call/no-show for three days. She told the supervisor she had been hospitalized because of pregnancy complications and didn’t have access to a phone and was sedated. She provided a doctor’s note that released her to return to work, but stated that she may need to be put on bed rest. The supervisor would like to terminate her because we can’t afford to continue employing someone so unreliable. Can we do this?

What happens next? An alleged harassment victim doesn’t want to come forward

06/20/2013
Q. An employee confided in a regional VP that their boss had invited a co-worker to have a drink in his hotel room while they were attending a conference. When she declined, the boss became angry. Now, the boss has reported the co-worker for leaving work early without permission. The employee doesn’t want anything bad to happen to her friend, but she can’t let this go without telling someone. The co-worker refuses to come forward herself out of fear of retaliation. What should we do?

New law permits veteran preferences in private sector

06/20/2013
Public employers in Minnesota have been able to give employment preference to veterans for years, but private employers that favor hiring vets have always run the risk of facing discrimination claims from other applicants who lack military experience. A new state law gives some limited protection to private employers with hiring policies that give preference to hiring veterans.