The EEOC says no.
In EEOC v. Consol Energy, Inc. et. al., Case No. 1:13-CV-215 (S.D. W. Va. Aug. 21, 2015), a jury found in favor of the EEOC in its claim brought under Title VII that the employer denied an employee a religious accommodation involving an exemption from using a biometric hand scanner.
Managers who are trying to do employees a good turn may find themselves in an unwanted predicament, if the EEOC ever winds up getting involved.
In EEOC v. Autozone, Inc., Case No. 14-CV-5579 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 4, 2015), Judge Amy St. Eve of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant and against the EEOC in a case in which the EEOC brought a disparate treatment discrimination suit on behalf of an individual who did not suffer an adverse employment action as a result of alleged discrimination.
DOL and EEOC Offer Insight into How They Will Approach FMLA and Reasonable Accommodation Enforcement
This week, I had the pleasure of presenting with Department of Labor and EEOC officials on key developments out of Washington with respect to leave management and accommodations.
For years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has taken the position that certain employment tests and screening procedures can serve to discriminate against racial and ethnic minorities in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) when not “properly validated” as “job-related” and “consistent with business necessity” under the Uniform Guidelines on Employment Selection Procedures (UGESP).
In EEOC v. Northern Star Hospitality, Inc., No. 12-CV-214 (W.D. Wis.), a case we have blogged about previously here, Judge Barbara B. Crabb of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin imposed contempt sanctions on an employer for failure to cooperate in post-judgment discovery and granted the EEOC’s request for attorneys’ fees for the time it spent bringing the contempt motion.
Legislative efforts have failed repeatedly at the federal level to add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the list of protected classifications under anti-discrimination laws.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) created the Action Council for Transformation to a Digital Charge System (“ACT Digital”) to enable the electronic submission of documents between the parties to a Charge of Discrimination and the EEOC.
Our loyal blog readers may recall a post we authored in October 2013 regarding EEOC v. JBS USA, LLC (the “Nebraska Case”), where Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska entered judgment for the employer.