Lobbying Affiliate: MML&K Government Solutions
{ Banner Image }

Employment Law Blog

When It Comes To Employment Issues, Choose A Firm That Thinks Outside the Cubicle.

Contact Us

250 Character(s) Remaining
Type the following characters: six, mike, three, romeo

* Indicates a required field.

Stay Connected

RSSSubscribe to this blog via RSS
Join us on LinkedIn
Facebook

Archives

Categories

McBrayer Blogs

Showing 18 posts in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

EEOC Updates Compliance Manual on Religious Discrimination

By Claire M. Vujanovic on March 23, 2021
Posted In Employment Discrimination Laws, Religious Employer, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Recently, the EEOC released updated guidance for employers regarding religious discrimination and accommodations in the Compliance Manual Section on Religious Discrimination. The updates override the previous iteration of the manual published in 2008. Importantly, this manual does not bind employers by law, but it does inform the way that the EEOC processes claims under the law and is therefore a crucial resource for employers.  With these updates, the EEOC clarified an important aspect of religious discrimination: who is protected by the Title VII. More >

Tags: Anti-Discrimination, EEOC, Employment Discrimination Laws, employment law, employment law for employers, Religious Accommodation and Discrimination

EEOC Issues Fact Sheet on Transgender Restroom Access

By Anne-Tyler Morgan on May 19, 2016
Posted In EEOC, Employment Discrimination Laws, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

On Monday, May 2nd, 2016, the EEOC issued a fact sheet entitled “Fact Sheet: Bathroom Access Rights for Transgender Employees Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” The fact sheet comports with the agency’s stance that Title VII protects gender identity under the prohibitions on discrimination based on sex and serves as a reminder to employers that federal law – and the EEOC’s interpretation of it – trumps state law on this issue, despite recent attention-grabbing media headlines.  More >

Tags: EEOC, restrooms, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, transgender

EEOC: Title VII Prohibits Employment Discrimination Based On Sexual Orientation

August 26, 2015
Posted In Employment Discrimination Laws, Employment Non-Discrimination Act ("ENDA"), Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges struck down restrictions on marriage by same-sex couples, but it did not address other forms of discrimination based on sexual orientation, such as in employment. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, however, did not wait for a ruling from the high court, instead ruling on its own that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prevents discrimination in an employment context on the basis of sexual orientation. This decision, Baldwin v. Foxx,[1] broadens Title VII protections considerably, although it remains to be seen if the high court agrees with the EEOC interpretation. More >

The Obergefell Decision and Employers

July 15, 2015
Posted In Employment Discrimination Laws, ERISA, Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)

The recent United States Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges significantly altered the legal landscape with respect to same-sex marriages, finding that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires all states to both license in-state same-sex marriages and recognize valid same-sex marriages performed out-of-state. The Court did not, however, go so far as to reach issues such as discrimination in employment or public accommodation. So, while legal same-sex marriage is the law of the land, those newly-married couples may face legal uncertainty when it comes to discrimination in public accommodations or their place of employment, unless contravening state law applies. That said, there are still several ways that the Obergefell decision and its counterpart, United States v. Windsor, will affect employers and employees. More >

What Employers Need to Know about Religious Discrimination after EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch

June 15, 2015
Posted In Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)

It’s rather fitting that the Supreme Court’s decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores turns on the idea of one’s belief; it is, after all, a decision about religious discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The belief at issue, however, is not the belief of the claimant of religious discrimination, but rather the belief of the employer. More >

It Takes Two (Racial Slurs to Support a Claim of Harassment, That Is)

June 1, 2015
Posted In Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Before we begin the analysis of the recent Fourth Circuit opinion in Boyer-Liberto v. Fontainebleau, let’s take a moment to clear something up: When asking how many times an employee may permissibly hurl a racial slur at another employee, can we all agree that the answer is none? Employers, we beseech you – do not, under any circumstances, allow your employees to berate any other employees with racial slurs. It may not necessarily rise to actionable levels under Title VII, but it is just atrocious and unacceptable behavior (and, as the court in this case noted, it CAN rise to actionable levels under Title VII). More >

A Title VII Transition?: Protections for Transgender Persons in the Workplace

May 11, 2015
Posted In Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)

Three years ago, the EEOC issued an opinion which held, for the first time, that discrimination against transgender persons based on gender identity is impermissible sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. See Macy v. Holder (Apr. 20, 2012). Last month, the EEOC revisited discrimination against transgender persons and released a decision that sheds some light on how the practical applications of this finding may affect employers, holding that certain bathroom restrictions for a transgender employee constituted discrimination. See Lusardi v. McHugh (Apr. 1, 2015). More >

Pregnancy Discrimination Claims after Young v. UPS

April 13, 2015
Posted In Adverse Employment Action, Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Young v. UPS

It was a difficult delivery, but the Supreme Court in Young v. UPS[1] gave birth to a new test in determining whether an employer has violated the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (“PDA”)[2]. More >

Sexual Harassment Mistakes Employers Make

By Cynthia L. Effinger on April 9, 2015
Posted In EEOC, Employee Misconduct, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Sexual harassment claims can quickly become a nightmare for employers, but so many aspects of the nightmare are caused in part by the employer’s own actions. The employer has opportunities to mitigate the damage in two key areas – the sexual harassment policy itself before the alleged harassment incident and the investigation that takes place afterword. This post will look at mistakes made in these two particular areas that can hurt employers and lead to potentially costly damages. More >

Employers – Don’t Be a Victim of Suspicious Timing

April 1, 2015
Posted In EEOC, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act

Where there’s smoke, there may be fire – at least, that appears to be a key takeaway from the Seventh Circuit case of Ledbetter v. Good Samaritan Ministries. The holding in this case is predicated on the notion that suspicious timing in an adverse employment action can give rise to a claim of retaliation under Title VII in absence of other solid evidence. More >

Lexington, KYLouisville, KYFrankfort, KY: MML&K Government SolutionsWashington, D.C.