We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 119

Employee not eligible for FMLA leave still protected by non-discrimination provisions
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • September 6 2012

Many employers offer leave of absence benefits to employees that supplement leaves of absence provided by the Family and Medical Leave Act


The declining value of non-disparagement provisions in separation agreements
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • November 3 2010

When entering into settlements or release agreements with departing employees, some employers want to bargain "hard" for non-disparagement provisions


MMPI was job-related and consistent with business necessity based on employee’s hostile conduct and independent psychologist’s recommendation
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • July 9 2013

Proclaiming that "statutory interpretation requires judges to use a little common sense," the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that


Fragrance-free workplace policy & work at home may have been reasonable accommodations for employee with asthma and chemical sensitivity to “Japanese Cherry Blossom”
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • September 6 2012

A federal court in Ohio recently ruled that an employee with asthma and chemical sensitivity to perfumes and scented products could pursue an Americans with Disabilities Act claim against her employer for not reasonably accommodating her disability, despite the many (albeit delayed) accommodations offered by her employer


No overtime pay liability when employee fails to report exact time worked
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • January 2 2013

A recent decision from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals instructs employers how they may avoid Fair Labor Standards Act overtime pay liability for


Lawfully fired employee may claim “chilled” exercise of FMLA rights despite receiving leave
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • March 3 2011

Employers have the duty not to "interfere with" the exercise of any right under the Family and Medical Leave Act


Re-seller beware: hospitals treating federal employees should expect the OFCCP
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • April 5 2013

Hospitals that agree to provide services to the members of a health planHMO ("Plan") also become government contractors, when the Plan covers


Is it worthwhile to fight unemployment benefits claims? Another reason to just say no
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • November 5 2012

Understandably, employers are upset when ex-employees fired for good cause - especially acts of misconduct - file unemployment compensation claims


Conditioning light duty assignment for pregnant employee on dismissal of her EEOC charge was retaliation
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • July 9 2012

In a case involving a scenario that was mishandled by the employer in too many ways to count, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled recently that an employer's conversion of an unconditional light duty assignment to a pregnant employee, to an assignment conditioned on her withdrawal of her EEOC charge was a retaliatory act under Title VII


HR director has no retaliatory discharge claim based on dismissal during her investigation of internal discrimination complaint
  • Sherman & Howard LLC
  • USA
  • July 9 2012

In our last newsletter, we observed that courts have increasingly been restricting retaliation claims, by circumscribing recognized employee "participation" in proceedings under the discrimination laws and employee "opposition" to unlawful discrimination