With the recent focus on the new Paid Sick Leave law coming in a few weeks, it’s been easy to miss a few court cases that have come out recently that should be of interest to employers and their counsel.
One such case, O’Reggio v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, provides important guidance
Last year, I visited Vancouver and got to go to Granville Island Public Market — one of the great markets in North America.
Sure, I could talk about the wonderful food I got there, but there was something else that felt very unique and downright modern — their restroom.
The bathroom had a sign —
In a pair of closely watched decisions, the Connecticut Appellate Court recently affirmed the lower court’s judgments in two related cases, finding that the use of “recent college graduates” or “recent graduate” in job postings did not constitute age discrimination per se.
In the cases, (CHRO v. Travelers and CHRO v. Yale Universit
Long time readers of this blog know how geeky I can be when it comes to the annual report statistics released by the CHRO. Back in 2022, for example, I noted the continued decline in cases filed with the state agency that is responsible for investigating discrimination claims. (I also called myself a “stat nerd”
Does the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (CFEPA) include claims of associational discrimination based on an employee’s association with a disabled individual?
That was the issue before the Connecticut Appellate Court in Demarco v. Charter Oak Temple Restoration Assn., Inc. decided yesterday.
The Court held that Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46a-60 (b) (1) of CFEPA
Tomorrow, the EEOC is expected to publish its final regulations for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. They were previewed in a press release earlier this week.
Since nearly every lawfirm is producing their own summary of what are, in my view, fairly straightforward implementation regulations, this post will take a different tact — namely how
Last week, Law360 quoted me in an article on marital status discrimination. (They timed it for Valentine’s Day; make of that what you will.)
The gist of the article is that marital status discrimination is something for employers to be mindful of.
And for that premise, I’m in agreement. Several states, including Connecticut, explicitly
Employment discrimination claims are often decided on the merits of the claim. Courts routinely have to answer the question: Did the employer discriminate on the basis of a protected class against an employee in terminating the employment of that individual?
But there’s another class of cases that can resolved on procedural grounds, often times in
Years ago, I wrote about how state employment law imposed a duty to engage in an interactive dialogue with an employee who had a disability and was requesting a reasonable accommodation.
But what it does it truly mean to engage in an interactive process?
A new case from the Connecticut Appellate Court provides some
Suppose an employee or tenant is the victim of housing or employment discrimination/harassment; what is the value of the ordinary (or in the court’s words “garden variety”) emotional distress that person suffers as a result of such discrimination or harassment.
I’ve actually talked about this before; back in 2021, the Appellate Court was asked