In the most consequential U.S. Supreme Court case in many years, the Court ruled this morning that Title VII prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
You can download the 6-3 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, here.
Connecticut has long prohibited employment discrimination on the basis of sexual
By now, you may have read about yesterday’s decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that Title VII bars discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Connecticut is in that federal circuit (along with New York and Vermont). You can download the decision in Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc., here. (You’ve been warned though
Over the last week or so, there have been two prominent Circuit Court decisions addressing whether Title VII (the federal law prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion and national origin) can be interpreted to also protect employees from being discriminated against because of
When you’ve been blogging as long as Jon Hyman (of Ohio Employer’s Law Blog) and I have, your minds seem to work in a similar fashion.
For a few days, I’ve been working on a draft of a blog post about the
Over the past month, after the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision, much has been made in the press about how it is unprecedented for the court to consider a company’s religious beliefs in making its decisions.
The issue of taking into account a corporation’s religious belief in the workplace has been also catapulted to
A federal bill banning workplace discrimination (known as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act “ENDA) on the basis of sexual orientation cleared a key procedural hurdle last night as the Senate voted to begin debate on the measure, 61-30. Passage by the Senate is now expected later this week. (You can find my prior coverage of ENDA
Back in June, after the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage, I made a fairly easy prediction:
The federal FMLA is also anticipated to undergo some pretty big changes in states that approve same-sex marriages. Already in 2010, the FMLA regulations suggested that married same-sex couples could take time off to care for a newborn
As many wait for the Supreme Court’s decision later this term on same-sex marriages, one issue that seems to get lost in the shuffle is the fact that there is still no federal law prohibiting discrimination in employment on the basis of sexual orientation.
For employers in Connecticut, this is basically a non-issue because Connecticut
The United States Department of Labor late today issued a new interpretation of what a "son or daughter" is under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to make it clear that an "employee who assumes the role of caring for a child receives parental rights to family leave regardless of the legal or
The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) has an article out today on their website (subscription may be required) about the effect that same-sex marriage laws and rulings are having on employers. The article compares California’s Proposition 8 initiative with Connecticut’s recent decision legalizing same-sex marriages.
As you will see, the reporter was kind enough to talk with