FindLaw | Find a Lawyer. Find Answers.

Library Search

• Recent Decisions Add to Employers' "To Do" Lists ( July 2006 )
  

  New decisions seem to keep popping up everywhere, adding to the complexity of managing employees. Two recent ones deserve some special attention: Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, decided on June 22, 2006, by the Supreme Court of the United States, and U-Haul Co of California, decided on June 8, 2006, by the National Labor Relations Board. The former makes it easier for disgruntled employees to claim retaliation under Title VII; the latter may call into question the enforceability of many individual employee-employer arbitration agreements.

• Recent Decisions Add to Employers' "To Do" Lists ( July 2006 )
  

  New decisions seem to keep popping up everywhere, adding to the complexity of managing employees. Two recent ones deserve some special attention: Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, decided on June 22, 2006, by the Supreme Court of the United States, and U-Haul Co of California, decided on June 8, 2006, by the National Labor Relations Board. The former makes it easier for disgruntled employees to claim retaliation under Title VII; the latter may call into question the enforceability of many individual employee-employer arbitration agreements.

• Ins and Outs of Retaliation Cases ( November 2004 )
  

  In retaliation cases, it matters not whether the initial workers' compensation claim filed was bogus or frivolous; a retaliation claim can be brought even on denied, rejected or even frivolous workers' compensation claims as long as the discipline, discharge or termination decision was related to filing of the workers' compensation claim. The timing of the discharge was within three weeks of his client's filing of her workers' compensation claim, and the decision may have been earlier. Never mind that his client was absent from work more than 80 times in 18 months.

• The Outer Limits of Workers' Compensation ( January 2005 )
  

  Three recent appellate court cases test the reach of workers' com-pensation trade-off protections for workers and immunity for employers.

• Courts Lessen Employee's Burden for Proving Retaliation Claim ( September 2005 )
  

  For employers, retaliation claims may very well be the scariest area of employment discrimination law because the merit of the employee's initial discrimination complaint may not prevent an employee from reaching a jury and ultimately prevailing on a retaliation claim. To establish retaliation, an employee need only show, generally, that he or she engaged in a "protected activity" (e.g., complaining of discrimination to management or filing a charge with the EEOC) and thereafter suffered an adverse employment action (e.g., termination, demotion, denial of a promotion), because of the protected activity. Perhaps for that reason, the number of retaliation-based charges filed with the EEOC has nearly tripled over the last 15 years.

• Employers Must Enforce Policies Uniformly ( October 2003 )
  

  Having well?written employment policies is a good thing, but it is only half the battle. If they are not enforced, they are like tools rusting away, unused in the garage. Worse, if they are enforced unevenly among employees, they can become tools of destruction. This was demonstrated rather starkly in <i>Equal Employment Opportunity Commissioner v. Kohler Co.</i>, in which the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a summary judgment in favor of the employer because the employer failed to enforce its discliplinary policies uniformly.

• Employers Should Keep An Eye on the "Breastfeeding Mother-Friendly Employer Bill" ( April 2003 )
  

  In our February 2003 flash report, we discussed legislative bills introduced in the 2003 legislative session that would have significant impact on employers. Since distribution of that flash report, a new bill has been introduced and is making a swift journey through the Oregon Senate. In this flash report we cover that bill, and review current Washington law on the subject.

• Worker's Compensation and Wrongful Discharge/Public Policy Claims in Nebraska ( April 2003 )
  

  Nebraska has long adhered to the "employment-at-will" doctrine and has recognized, in many cases, a contract exception to that doctrine. While the Nebraska Supreme Court has declined to adopt a "good faith and fair dealing" exception to the doctrine, the Court has recognized, in a few cases, a public policy exception to the employment-at-will doctrine.

• Jackson Lewis:Risk Report-An Employment Practices Liability Update ( April 2000 )
  

  In this issue of the Risk Report, the issue of retaliation claims are discussed including the elements of an actionable claim of retaliation and the legal grounds for a retaliation claim.