Last month, Los Angeles joined a growing group of U.S. cities taking steps to end hiring discrimination based on a job applicant's criminal history. The "Los Angeles Fair Chance Initiative for Hiring" ordinance took effect on January 22 and is arguably the strongest and most progressive so-called "Ban the Box" law in the country.
President Trump's pick for Labor Secretary, Hardee's and Carl's Jr. CEO, Andrew Puzder, has come under attack by workers and their advocates since his nomination was first announced in December. Rightly so. Puzder's approach to doing business and his previous statements regarding key workplace issues paint a very worrisome picture regarding how workers will fare under his watch. Just ask the workers at his own company, who, in a report issued this week, describe a pattern of workplace violations, including being required to work sick and without pay, resulting from business decisions that appear to give low priority to workers' health and well-being.
A Ninth Circuit panel holds, in a Title VII and Oregon state law case, that an employer's breaking into a work locker constitutes a materially adverse employment action. The panel also splits - 2-1 - over whether the employer failed to take appropriate steps to stop alleged racial harassment, and whether it disproportionately punished the plaintiff by firing him (for leaving the workplace) while taking no action against the harasser.
We often hear media reports about workplace discrimination involving gender, race, national origin, age, and disability that is all too common. But most Americans would be surprised to learn that each year thousands of employees are subjected to blatant and harmful discrimination simply because they are veterans or are currently serving in the Armed Forces - and this discrimination harms our national security by discouraging participation in the National Guard and Reserve.
Back in 2012, Forbes caused a stir when it published an article detailing how Target was tracking customer purchases so closely that it figured out a teen was pregnant before she had even told her parents. For many people, it was their first real glimpse of how big data - the ever-growing mass of our electronically-stored personal information - is being analyzed to predict behaviors and spot trends. The idea that a retailer could have such detailed knowledge of the most intimate aspects of our lives raised many concerns about how that information was being used.
So-called "wearables," such as fitness trackers, are becoming more and more ubiquitous every day. It's easy to see why. They count our steps, monitor our heart rate, measure the quality of our sleep, and we can use that information to improve our health.
In a Monday session during the American Bar Association's annual meeting in San Francisco this past weekend, the ABA House of Delegates voted to approve a change to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct that will make it an ethical violation for attorneys to harass or discriminate in the course of their practices.
When the U.S. Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins last May, employers, as well as the companies that provide employers with job applicants' background information, argued that the ruling was a significant change to the law of standing. Despite the smokescreen they've attempted to raise, however, Spokeo hasn't changed standing at all, and consumers (including jobseekers) are just as empowered to seek redress for Fair Credit Reporting Act violations today as they were before.
The U.S. trucking industry is a paradox. With a growing shortage of drivers, trucking companies desperately need to put more people behind the wheel. At the same time, an increasing number of women are looking to enter the industry, eager for the opportunity. Instead of being welcomed, however, many encounter a hostile work environment, including egregious sexual harassment.
An Arab-American Muslim woman from Morocco alleges that she suffered years of ethnic and religious harassment by the company's Chief Financial Officer, and was then fired 75 minutes after complaining about it. The Fourth Circuit reverses summary judgment on her Title VII and § 1981 complaint, in a blockbuster, 46-page opinion that straightens out several wrong turns that district courts take when ruling on dispositive motions.