http://www.elinfonet.com/fedindex/22 Articles discussing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:07:31 EST en-us http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=7128 Article: 7128 Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) The U.S. Supreme Court recently concluded its 2007 term, during which employees were often the prevailing party. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=7126 Article: 7126 Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) The United States Supreme Court decided several significant employment law cases during the 2007 Term. The Court’s opinions ranged from the validity of administrative charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, to the scope of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, as well as to anti-retaliation provisions. There currently are four cases on the docket for next Term, each of which is summarized below. (The Court may add more cases to the docket as the new Term approaches in October 2007). http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=7123 Article: 7123 Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) Creating a split among the federal appeals courts, the Second Circuit recently held that including an election of remedies provision in a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is not unlawful retaliation in violation of Title VII. See Richardson v. Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (July 7, 2008). The clause at issue in this case provided that disputes over unlawful discrimination would be subject to the CBA’s grievance procedure but would not be arbitrable if the employee filed a discrimination charge with the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO) (the state civil rights agency, who was also the employer in this case). http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=7103 Article: 7103 Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) In a year already marked by several significant employment law decisions, the Supreme Court handed down four new opinions on June 19th, establishing important precedent in areas ranging from age discrimination to employee benefits. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=7076 Article: 7076 Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) In a previous issue we took a look at several pending laws that would drastically change the labor and employment scene ("Cute Titles for Bad Laws" by John Zenor, Labor Letter, May 2008). This month we'll review a few more pieces of pending legislation. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=6934 Article: 6934 Fri, 23 May 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) Human resources records are changing. Less than five years ago, the most common type of HR record was a paper personnel file, usually containing standard categories of paper documents. Companies not only employ online recruiting and application processes and enterprise-wide personnel databases, but many day-to-day employee communications take the form of email or instant messaging. As these records become more prevalent in the daily functions performed by a human resources department, they also become more important in employment-related litigation. The changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that took effect in December 2006 have received much press but little praise. Interestingly, many of the key decisions relating to electronic records, both before and after the rule changes, were in the area of employment disputes. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=6911 Article: 6911 Wed, 07 May 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) Two recent court decisions have further defined the contours of the "ministerial exception," which prohibits courts from addressing employment claims brought against religious organizations when the decisions were based on the organization's religious principals or practices. Archdiocese of Washington v. Moersen demonstrates that this exception has its limits; Klouda v. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary shows just how far the exception can be applied. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=6888 Article: 6888 Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) The Supreme Court has issued several employment related decisions already this year. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=6876 Article: 6876 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) Surviving Discrimination Claims. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?popID=6857 Article: 6857 Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:00:00 EST elin@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) In a unanimous decision on February 26, 2008, in the case Sprint/United Management Company v. Mendelsohn, the United States Supreme Court held that a trial court can permit a plaintiff employee to introduce evidence that other employees have also experienced discrimination, provided that the testimony—also known as “me too” evidence—is relevant to the case and its probative value is not substantially outweighed by the danger of its prejudicial effect before the jury. In so ruling, the Supreme Court clarified that “me too” evidence is neither per se admissible nor per se inadmissible but, rather, the trial court must make a determination weighing the evidence's relevance, probative value, and prejudicial effect.