Last week, I had the privilege of speaking at the ABA Section of Labor and Employment Law’ Employment Rights and Responsibilities Midwinter Meeting on a topic that has been a recurring theme on this blog for nearly two decades: “Bostock, Executive Orders, and the Evolving Framework for Gender Identity Discrimination.”
Our panel featured an outstanding
Less than two weeks away until I join my ABA Section of Labor and Employment Law friends at the Employment Rights and Responsibilities Midwinter Meeting in Nashville.
There are so many great programs planned, but I’m looking forward to a panel I’m on regarding “Bostock, Executive Orders and the Evolving Framework for Gender Identity Discrimination”.
Besides
If you thought the new Biden White House would take it easy on the use of Executive Orders, you haven’t been paying attention. President Biden has been indicating that he would use Executive Orders liberally in the first few days to either develop policy or turn around policies that he believes should be revoked.
The
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
One of the quirks of discrimination law in Connecticut concerns sexual orientation. Back in 1991, the General Assembly passed a wide-ranging bill that added sexual orientation as one of the protected classes that employers could not base decisions on.
Sort of.
Rather than add sexual orientation to the key employment law statute that bars discrimination
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
The American Bar Association (ABA) holds its Midyear Meeting later this week in Vancouver (Canada!) and the House of Delegates is scheduled to debate several resolutions of interest to employers and employment lawyers.
As readers of this blog, you happen to “know” the Connecticut State Delegate (me!), coordinating a delegation of several esteemed lawyers from
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