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 73

Court issues preliminary injunction prohibiting employer from terminating employee pending resolution of EEOC lawsuit
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2015

On July 22, 2015, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Peters’ Bakery, Case No. 13-CV-045107 (N.D. Cal. July 22, 2015), Judge Beth Labson


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


U.S. Supreme Court recognizes fundamental right to same-sex marriage nationwide: impact of the decision on employers
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • June 26 2015

In a landmark decision, today the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a fundamental right for same-sex couples to marry throughout the country. In a 5-4


Stock-not so-well: officers denied class certification of age discrimination claims (again)
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • May 27 2015

As we reported here to our loyal blog readers, in April 2014, the Ninth Circuit overturned an order denying class certification of age discrimination


The Supreme Court weighs the Constitutionality of restricting marriage to opposite sex couples, and the impact their decision may have for employers
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • April 28 2015

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on two questions regarding the Constitutionality of state laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex


Separation agreement attack redux EEOC takes another swing at employer’s standard release language, and loses on key claims
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • December 8 2014

Earlier this year, we blogged about the EEOC's aggressive attack on CVS Pharmacy Inc.'s standard release agreement which contained terms more


Washington Court holds employer farm’s ban on guests in employee housing illegal
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • November 10 2014

On November 3, 2014, Honorable Susan K. Cook of the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of Skagit entered an order


EEOC pushes its strategic enforcement plan and advocates for transgender workplace protections under Title VII
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2014

No federal statute explicitly prohibits employment discrimination based on gender identity or expression. Nevertheless, in recent years, the EEOC has


Court upholds jury verdict that EEOC is not entitled to award of putative damages
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • August 29 2014

On August 21, 2014, in the case EEOC v. Swissport Fueling, Inc., Case No. CV-10-02101-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz. Aug. 21, 2014) (a case we previously blogged


SCOTUS agrees to consider whether pregnant workers must be able to perform the essential functions of the job
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 9 2014

Last week, in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc.,the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to answer the question of whether an employer is required to