Discrimination

Subscribe to Discrimination via RSS

From smart watches to exoskeletons, wearable technologies are quickly changing the landscape of the American workplace. Several states and administrative agencies have responded to this shift by enacting new laws and issuing regulatory guidance concerning the use of such technologies. The latest of these responses includes a fact sheet issued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) titled “Wearables in the Workplace: Using Wearable Technologies Under Federal Employment Discrimination Laws.” The fact sheet provides guidance on how employers can use wearable technologies while maintaining compliance with various federal employment laws. More broadly, the fact sheet signals growing concern over the use of employee-monitoring technologies. Continue Reading Wearable Technologies and Employment Risks – EEOC Issues New Guidance

On January 21, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” This Executive Order is a major pivot in federal policy regarding affirmative action and diversity initiatives, which have been in place for decades, particularly within federal contracting. The implications of this Executive Order are far-reaching, affecting both federal contractors and private employers across the United States.Continue Reading Analyzing President Trump’s Latest Executive Order Titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity”

On January 9, 2025, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin and the Division on Civil Rights issued guidance stating that New Jersey’s anti-discrimination law applies to artificial intelligence. Specifically, the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD”) applies to algorithmic discrimination – discrimination that results from the use of automated decision-making tools – the same way it has long applied to other forms of discriminatory conduct.Continue Reading New Jersey Guidance on AI: Employers Must Comply With State Anti-Discrimination Standards

As Los Angeles (the “City”) grapples with the impacts of the devastating wildfires, employers are facing critical decisions about protecting their workforce while maintaining operations. While Cal/OSHA recently urged employers to protect workers from unhealthy air in Los Angeles County, this article will provide further insight on a variety of the complex legal obligations California employers must navigate during wildfire and other natural disaster emergencies.Continue Reading Navigating Employer Obligations During California’s Wildfire Disasters

Effective as of March 20, 2024, New York City law permits “any person” to initiate a private right of action for violations of the Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (“ESSTA”). The new law amends Section 20-924 of the New York City Administrative Code and allows employees to file a lawsuit alleging a violation of ESSTA within two years of the date the employee knew or should have known about the alleged violation.Continue Reading NYC Permits Private Right of Action for Earned Safe and Sick Time Violations

On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a decades-old circuit split regarding what amount of harm a plaintiff must demonstrate to bring an employment discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (“Title VII”). In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, a unified Court ruled that a plaintiff need only show “some”—and not “significant”—harm from an employment decision to plead and prove employment discrimination under Title VII. Before Muldrow, a number of appellate courts dismissed transfer-based Title VII claims unless the plaintiff could show that the transfer resulted in “significant” harm. The Supreme Court rejected that standard in Muldrow, holding that a plaintiff need only show that the transfer resulted in “some harm” with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment. The Supreme Court’s new standard raises fresh considerations for employers making transfer decisions, and may have broader implications beyond the transfer context.Continue Reading Supreme Court Eases Burden for Title VII Plaintiffs Challenging Transfer Decisions

The District of Columbia will soon require employers to disclose pay ranges in job postings after Mayor Muriel Bowser signed the Wage Transparency Omnibus Amendment Act of 2023 into law on Friday January 12, 2024. When it goes into effect on June 30, 2024, the District will join a growing number of states with wage transparency laws, including Illinois, California, New York, Colorado, Massachusetts, and Washington State.Continue Reading DC Joins the Wage Transparency Movement

In the past few months, California Governor Newsom has signed numerous new employment laws affecting California employers of all sizes. Below is a summary of some of the laws going into effect in 2024.Continue Reading Looking Ahead: New California Employment Laws for 2024

On November 17, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed a new law that further limits the terms employers may include in release agreements relating to claims of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. The law took effect immediately and further broadens the restrictions on release agreements already contained in New York General Obligations Law Section 5-336 (“Section 5-336”).Continue Reading New York Amends Its Release Agreement Law for the Third Time

On October 8, 2023, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Senate Bill No. 497, the “Equal Pay and Anti-Retaliation Protection Act.” The new law amends California Labor Code sections 98.6, 1102.5, and 1197.5 to create a “rebuttable presumption of retaliation” if an employee experiences an adverse employment action within 90 days of engaging in any protected activity covered by the specified sections. This new law, which will become effective on January 1, 2024, also entitles a prevailing plaintiff civil penalties for each violation.Continue Reading New California Law Makes It Easier for Employees to Establish Retaliation Claims for Alleged Labor Code Violations