Labor & Employment Labor and Employment Decisions from the Supreme Court’s 2018–19 Term The Court’s 2018–19 term can aptly be described as the term that did not live up to the hype with respect to its labor and employment law rulings.
Labor & Employment Arbitrators’ Review of Bullying in the Workplace Bad behavior in the workplace, characterized as bullying, can include physical assault, threats, interference with work, and persistent verbal attacks.
Labor & Employment The Case of the Dozing Decider: Tips for Dealing with a Napping Neutral The ability to choose the arbitrator ranks high on the list of presumed advantages of arbitration over litigation. So, it is not surprising that parties and their advocates devote significant time and effort to arbitrator selection.
Labor & Employment “Equal Opportunity Harasser” Doctrine: Flawed, Pernicious, Abrogated Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the Act) prohibits, among other things, gender-based discrimination in employment. While the Act does not prohibit sexual harassment expressly, gender-based harassment amounts to gender discrimination.
Labor & Employment A New Global Mandate to End Violence and Harassment in the World of Work: A Gender-Responsive Approach In 2019, the International Labour Organization (ILO) celebrated one hundred years of promoting social justice and decent work. The ILO marked its centenary in a particularly meaningful and enduring manner, with a focus on ending violence and harassment in the world of work, including gender-based violence and harassment.
Labor & Employment The Pandemic-Era and Broader Implications of Employer Decision-Making in Workplace Injury Cases A pivotal question in workplace injury cases is whether the injury is compensable. Generally, workplace injuries are compensable under the state workers’ compensation statute if the accident arises out of and in the course of the employment.
Labor & Employment Transgender Inclusive Employer Health Benefits for Employees and Dependents Currently, there is no explicit employment-related statutory requirement to offer transgender-inclusive health plans. Even in the absence of an explicit federal statutory requirement to offer trans-inclusive health plans though, employers should review their current health plans for exclusions or denials that adversely affect transgender employees in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Bostock v. Clayton County decision and the Final Rule on Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and strive towards offering trans-inclusive health plans to support transgender employees and employees with transgender dependents.