Category Archives: Retaliation

Subscribe to Retaliation RSS Feed

New Freelancer Law Imposes Additional Requirements For NYC Companies Contracting With Freelancers

The Establishing Protections for Freelance Workers Act, also known as the Freelance Isn’t Free Act, (the “Freelance Law”), which was touted by New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio as the first law in the nation aimed at protecting wage payment rights of freelance workers, became effective last Monday, May 15, 2017. The Freelance Law … Continue Reading

California Employers – New Year, New Rules in 2017

The new year will bring along a variety of new obligations for California employers.  Although some of the new laws clarify existing law and provide helpful guidance, several impose additional requirements.  This update highlights key provisions of some of the more notable changes taking effect in 2017.  Links to the statutes and/or prior updates regarding … Continue Reading

Ramirez v. Dependable Highway Express: The Reasonable Accommodation of an Employee’s Family

In Luis Castro-Ramirez v. Dependable Highway Express, the California Court of Appeal held that California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) – which requires employers to reasonably accommodate employees with disabilities – now requires employers to reasonably accommodate employees who are associated with a disabled person.  This is an unprecedented decision and will likely to … Continue Reading

New Year, New Rules For Employers Doing Business in California

This year the California Legislature added over a dozen new employment laws, many of which take effect on January 1, 2016.  Some of these laws impose new prohibitions on employers, while others provide positive benefits such as safe harbors, cure provisions, and employer incentives for reclassification of certain independent contractors.  This update highlights key provisions … Continue Reading

What is Retaliation in the Second Circuit Under the FLSA?

On April 20, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed a long-standing precedent when it held in Greathouse v. JHS Security Inc., that an internal oral complaint could be sufficient to demonstrate protected activity and form the basis for a retaliation claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).  While … Continue Reading

Equal Pay Issues Addressed by President Obama on “National Equal Pay Day,” When He Signed An Executive Order and Presidential Memorandum Affecting Federal Contractors

On April 8, 2014, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum that will require federal contractors and subcontractors to provide to the U.S. Department of Labor compensation data based on their employees’ sex and race.  The President also signed that day an Executive Order preventing federal contractors from retaliating and discriminating against employees who discuss their … Continue Reading

New Jersey Law Now Protects Employees Who Ask Fellow Employees (or Former Employees) for Their Salary Information

Effective August 29, 2013, New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination prohibits employer reprisals against an employee who asks another employee, or former employee, for her rate of pay, as well as other information such as the other employee’s benefits, job category, race, ethnicity or national origin.  To be protected, however, the employee’s request must be for … Continue Reading

New Jersey Supreme Court Expands State Law Retaliation Claims

On July 17, 2013, the Supreme Court of New Jersey expanded the state’s already broad Law Against Discrimination (LAD), holding that an employee’s complaints about inappropriate workplace conduct need not identify any specific victim of discrimination or harassment to constitute protected activity. Rather, the court held, complaints about derogatory comments concerning a protected class can … Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court Requires Litigants To Prove “But-For Causation” In Workplace Retaliation Lawsuits

In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, — U.S. — (June 24, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision handed employers a victory by raising the legal standard that an employee must satisfy to prove unlawful retaliation. In Nassar, a physician attempted to show that his employer retaliated against him for … Continue Reading

NLRB Launches New Website Regarding Concerted Activity

Last week, in an effort to increase its presence and exposure in the workplace, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) launched a new webpage to define and provide specific examples of what it considers “concerted activity.” As you may be aware, the National Labor Relations Act’s (“NLRA”) Section 7 provides that “[e]mployees shall have the … Continue Reading

LAY-OFFS CANNOT ALWAYS AVOID DISCRIMINATION OR RETALIATION TRIALS

In Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. The Boeing Company (August 18, 2009), the Ninth Circuit reminded employers that reductions-in-force do not mean that the company may still not have to defend discrimination and retaliation claims. The Ninth Circuit held that the EEOC was entitled to a trial against Boeing because the EEOC had adequate evidence from … Continue Reading

Second Circuit Court Of Appeals Rules That An Employer Must Notify Its Insurer Of A Potential Claim Upon Receiving A Demand Letter From Counsel

The Second Circuit’s ruling in Westrec Marina Management v. Arrowood Indemnity Co. is a warning to employers to report potential claims to their insurance carrier as soon as possible or face denial of coverage.  In Westrec, an employee filed a charge of discrimination against Westrec with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) … Continue Reading

The California Supreme Court Rules That Employees Cannot Be Held Personally Liable For Retaliation

A decade ago, in Reno v. Baird, the California Supreme Court held that individual employees could not be held personally liable for discrimination under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.  Until this past week, however, the law regarding whether individual employees could be held liable for retaliation was unsettled.  In Jones v. The Lodge … Continue Reading

The California Supreme Court Clarifies The Conduct Necessary To State A Claim For Retaliation

On August 11, 2005, the California Supreme Court, in Yanowitz v. L’Oreal USA, Inc., held that an employee’s refusal to follow a supervisor’s order that the employee reasonably believes to be discriminatory constitutes protected activity in a retaliation claim under the Fair Employment and Housing Act. In that case, Yanowitz alleged that she refused to … Continue Reading
LexBlog