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 31,192

NLRB reversed for ignoring “common sense”
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 20 2015

In Southern New England Telephone Company v. NLRB, the D.C. Circuit reversed an NLRB decision finding it unlawful to prohibit public-facing employees


NLRB weekly Summary of decisions, July 6 10, 2015
  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • USA
  • July 21 2015

The Board affirmed the Administrative Law Judge’s findings that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) and engaged in objectionable conduct by


California Supreme Court raises standard for employers to recover fees in FEHA suits
  • Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP
  • USA
  • May 27 2015

To recoup costs in a Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) suit, a prevailing employer must prove that a discrimination suit was “objectively


D.C. Circuit reverses NLRB's decision that AT&T violated employees' rights when it suspended employees for wearing t-shirt disparaging the company
  • Ford & Harrison LLP
  • USA
  • July 21 2015

It was probably not that surprising that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed the National Labor Relations Board's


The changing landscape of LGBT rights in employment law
  • Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
  • USA
  • July 21 2015

The United States Supreme Court declared marriage equality has reached the nation. Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, mandated all states issue


Employment law update after Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc.: must employers provide accommodations for pregnant employees?
  • Burr & Forman LLP
  • USA
  • March 30 2015

A pregnant employee walks into your office and tells you that she has a lifting restriction of twenty pounds and needs an accommodation because she


The Supreme Court, pregnancy accommodation and unfinished business
  • Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
  • USA
  • March 27 2015

On March 25, 2015, the Supreme Court announced its long-awaited decision in Young v. United Parcel Service regarding the scope of required


Young v. UPS calls for a review of accommodations offered to pregnant employees
  • Cozen O'Connor
  • USA
  • March 27 2015

On March 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff can demonstrate at least a genuine dispute as to whether an employer violates the


UPS’ employment policies come under scrutiny, again
  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP
  • USA
  • July 21 2015

Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a class action lawsuit against the United Parcel Service (UPS), claiming that the


The EEOC rules that existing federal law prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 20 2015

In a landmark ruling on July 15, 2015 in _____ name of charging party kept secret v. Foxx, EEOC Appeal No. 2012-24738-FAA-03 (July 15, 2015), the U