This post is for the employment law nerds out there.
You know who you are.
You pore over the statistics that show a correlation between the unemployment rate and EEOC filings. (I see you Lawffice Space.)
You rate who the “Worst Employer” is of 2017. (Can’t wait for the announcement next week, Ohio
Through a recent FOI request, I was able to take a peek at the latest case statistics coming out of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. (The CHRO has since added them to the website as well.)
I’ve done these recaps in years before (here’s 2016 for example) and I think
So, in my prior two posts about the new case statistical reports from the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, I’ve looked at the case statistics to see that harassment and terms & conditions claims are up, and that ancestry, race & color claims filed are also up.
But what else can
As I noted on Friday, the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities has, at long last, released case statistics for 2014-2015 fiscal year and has updated their statistics for the last several years.
As a result, there are lots of new numbers to pore over and information
Lately, I’ve been hearing a lot of complaints about the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities from both attorneys and clients. And I’ve come to one conclusion:
The CHRO Complaint Procedure needs a reboot.
Now, before you dismiss this as a critical column – let’s be clear. I like many reboots. Sure, the Superman Returns movie paled in comparison to the Christopher Reeve version, but I thought the new Star Trek reboot was pretty snazzy.
Why do movies go through reboots? Because the formula that had worked for the movie series for so long has just stopped working.
Think George Clooney in Batman & Robin and then the reboot with Christian Bale.
And right now, the process that the CHRO has created is just not working. It’s not working for individuals, it’s not working for companies and, I believe, it’s not really working well for the agency itself. (And note too that I’m not suggesting the agency itself needs a reboot — though some have argued for that — rather, it’s the process as mandated by the law that this post is addressing.)
A reboot doesn’t mean failure; it doesn’t mean to throw out the entire formula. The agency has made some good strides on public outreach, for example, under the new leadership team. It is closing cases at a good clip and the mediation process seems better than in years past with dedicated staff just for mediations.
And I wouldn’t go so far as to say we live in a post-modern age where it has completely outlived its usefulness.
But the complaint procedure which was reworked a few years ago just isn’t working for anyone. Here’s why:Continue Reading The CHRO Complaint Process Needs A Reboot
This post continues my public service outreach on a program developed by the Connecticut Bar Foundation.
As I mentioned earlier this month, I am chairing what I expect will be a terrific educational program on April 9th at UConn Law School on how technology is changing the practice of law. Full details to this
Earlier this year, a case out of New Haven caused quite a stir at the Second Circuit when it addressed (or, as some people believe, failed to address) a reverse d
iscrimination case.
Now, word comes that the firefighters who lost the case are seeking to have the U.S. Supreme Court decide the issue by