Tag: discrimination

Plaintiff’s Attorney Fined for Withholding Evidence in ADA Suit

An employee’s attorney must pay $5,000 for omitting important information in an Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuit, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled. In Kempter v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co. , No. 13-1036 (6th Cir. Aug. 26, 2013), the plaintiff’s attorney failed to mention that that his client, Cathie Kempter, had been permanently restricted […]

Print

No more human rights forum shopping?

By Lindsey Taylor A few weeks ago, we reported on the recent decision in Baker v. Navistar Canada Inc., which confirmed that unionized employees aren’t able to bring employment claims to court. Rather, these claims must be brought within the framework of the special legal relationship between the union and the employer, either by way […]

Print

Sex, religion, and retaliation

by Mark I. Schickman I keep waiting for the day that employment discrimination claims disappear. We spend a ton of time training employees to prevent and avoid discriminatory conduct, and the proper behavior is pretty intuitive. So, logically, employment discrimination should have been eradicated, like polio and smallpox. It would be terrible for my business […]

Print

Title VII Standard for Retaliation Claims Gets Scaled Back by Supreme Court

Noting that the increasing number of employee retaliation claims in employment discrimination cases calls for the proper interpretation and implementation of statutory language, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 issued a 5-4 ruling that will likely make it easier for employers to fend off such claims. In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. […]

Print

Supreme Court Narrows Scope of ‘Supervisor’ Status in Title VII Discrimination Claims

The term “supervisor” is not to be taken lightly when determining the scope of employer liability in employment discrimination claims, according to the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 24, the court held in a 5-4 decision that an employee is a “supervisor” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act only if he or she […]

Print

Managing the message in the hiring process in Canada: human rights risks

By Marc Rodrigue Hiring a new employee can be a lengthy process, fraught with complex evaluations of skills, qualifications, and other attributes. The whole process must of course comply with applicable provincial and federal antidiscrimination laws. What people say during the process may provide evidence that a hiring decision is discriminatory. Where multiple people are […]

Print

Nondisabled Employees May Challenge Medical Exams

Employees need not have a disability to challenge the legality of an employer’s required medical exams, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in a case of first impression. At the same time, the court also reaffirmed the ability of an employer to request an examination because it was related to performing a […]

Print

Final Wellness Rule: Employers Must Offer Choices Among Health Goals, If Rewards Are Offered

Federal agencies just issued new final rules for contingency-based wellness program goals under health reform. If employers offer to give a reward (such as discounted health insurance premiums) to workers who accomplish some kind of biometric goal (a contingency standard), then employers must have a standing “reasonable alternative” to the contingency-based standard, government officials told […]

Print

Supreme Court Declines ADA Reassignment Question

The U.S. Supreme Court again refused to decide whether the Americans with Disabilities Act requires employers to reassign employees with disabilities to vacant positions, without requiring them to compete with other candidates. The Court declined May 28 to hear EEOC v. United Airlines Inc., No. 10-cv-01699, 2012 WL 718503 (7th Cir. March 7, 2012). The circuit-court divide on […]

Print

New ADA Compliance Guidance Covers Cancer, Diabetes, Epilipsy and Intellectual Disabilities

The agency responsible for enforcing the Americans with Disabilities has revised several of its guidance documents to reflect recent changes to the law. The May 15 changes were necessary because of the ADA Amendments Act, which expanded the law’s coverage in 2009, the U.S said in a press release. The documents explain how ADA applies […]

Print