I recently had the pleasure of joining the American Bar Association’s Labor and Employment Law Podcast for a conversation about one of the most important — and fastest-moving — topics in our field right now: artificial intelligence in the workplace.
The episode, titled “AI Tools and Labor Law: Legal Guardrails and Looming Minefields,” is hosted
I have often said that getting summary judgment in an employment discrimination case in Connecticut state court is hard.
State judges are typically reluctant to grant such motions, and the conventional wisdom among practitioners is that it takes extraordinary facts to get there.
Which is what makes a recent decision worth noting. The court granted
I’ve been writing this blog long enough that, let’s just say, that retirement is closer than it was when I started. Heck, I’ve even had friends retire early recently.
But here’s a question that I sometimes hear: is an employer’s reference to retirement enough to satisfy a claim of age discrimination?
Not always but maybe
Connecticut’s 2026 legislative session produced one of the most ambitious workforce packages the state has seen in recent years. Several new laws take effect on October 1, 2026, and employers need to be preparing now.
In the latest episode of From Lawyer to Employer, I sat down with my colleague Sarah Niemiroski to walk
Confession time: I sometimes go down a Reddit rabbit hole and the “Is This AI?” forum might be one of them.
So, a recent post tells a story that should make every employer paying expense reimbursements sit up. An employee submitted a receipt for a package release payment. The tracking number checked out. But
In a classic Seinfeld episode, George Costanza once built a bed under his desk at Yankee Stadium so he could nap during the workday.
But note to future employees: Sleeping on the job can (and probably will) get you fired on the job and the courts can (and likely will) dismiss a lawsuit against the
The Second Circuit issued a decision yesterday that reinforces a principle employers sometimes forget in the accommodation process: doing something is not the same as doing enough.
In Raymond v. 1199SEIU National Benefit Fund, the court vacated summary judgment for the employer on an ADA failure-to-accommodate claim. The employee had a vein condition that
My colleagues and I published a detailed breakdown this week over on the Employment Law Letter of the Second Circuit’s new framework for religious accommodation claims under Title VII. The short version: the court has replaced the familiar “notice plus adverse action” prima facie test with a motive-based inquiry drawn from the Supreme Court’s 2015
Can a company that uses progressive discipline for some employees be forced to use it for all employees? A new decision from the District of Connecticut says no, and the reasoning provides a useful roadmap for employers who want to preserve their at-will flexibility. It also reinforces a notion that employment law attorneys often stress
A federal magistrate judge in Connecticut just broke new ground for litigation involving artificial intelligence. It’s not an employment case, but it’s going to have big implications for employers in Connecticut and beyond.
In Conservation Law Foundation v. Shell Oil Co. (D. Conn. May 18, 2026), Magistrate Judge Thomas Farrish granted a motion to compel