Summary: The EEOC is tasked with the enforcement of many of the laws that ensure a fair and equitable workplace. As such, the role of who is at the helm of the agency is not small matter. Recently, Karla Gilbride has been appointed as the new General Counsel for the
The Omicron variant of Covid-19 has been spreading like wildfire both among the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Contracting the new strain is causing many to have to take time off of work and out of the office (one would hope). Suppose, however, that once you labor
“[P]hysical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects of society, yet many people with physical or mental disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination[.]” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(a)(1). Accordingly, Congress passed, and subsequently
If a person or company breaches a contract they have, that person or company can be sued immediately in court. If someone gets in a car wreck, in theory, a lawsuit could happen the next day. Ditto if you don’t get paid minimum wage or overtime. But with employment
As a precursor to filing a lawsuit under the laws that the EEOC enforces such as Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, employees must first file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. As it stands now, the vast majority of these charges are dismissed by the EEOC. But not because these charges lack merit. The dismissal is often necessitated by a lack of resources and investigators. Often times this leaves the EEOC unable to conduct a proper investigation into the thousands of charges that are filed each year with the federal agency. 
At this moment, the EEOC is on the precipice of making two major changes to the process of how the federal agency is going to handle the dismissal of charges of discrimination. These changes will include a change in the procedures in which the dismissals are processed, and they will include a change in the dismissal language contained in the right to sue letters that the EEOC issues upon the dismissal of a charge of discrimination. I will attempt to briefly outline some of the dangers and benefits of these changesContinue Reading EEOC Contemplates Much Needed Changes for Charge Dismissals
We have a lot of potential clients come to us because they are working in what they consider to be a hostile work environment. Their boss yells at them, belittles them, intimidates them, mocks them, etc. Sometimes this treatment is constant. Sometimes this treatment is intermittent but extreme. But generally speaking, these are not petty slights or simple annoyances; it is something more. Overall, these employees are working in an environment a reasonable employee would consider hostile, intimidating, or abusive.
Common sense would dictate that an employer should not be allowed to subject its employees to such treatment. However, unfortunately, there is no federal or Texas law that broadly protects employees from a hostile work environment.Continue Reading The Hostile Work Environment
“A claim is considered exhausted if is within the scope of the EEOC complaint and reasonably expected to grow out of a charge of discrimination. In examining a Title VII or ADEA action, the Court’s inquiry is not…limited to the exact charge [of discrimination]. The Fifth Circuit has recognized that a Title VII plaintiff is
“During his deposition, [decision-maker] testified that he made the decision not to renew [employee’s] contract because ‘it came down to issues of trust.’ When explaining what issues of trust he had with [employee], [decision-maker] referenced, among other things, [employee’s] report in which she claimed he bumped into her. . . [a]ccordingly, when asked to explain
“The evidence shows that the [P]laintiff submitted a DOTD grievance form on May 24, 2011 regarding alleged improper conduct by [Supervisor] and then provided testimony to the EEOC on July 7, 2011 in connection with complaints filed by two subordinate employees…. Additionally, the evidence indicates that DOTD transferred the [P]laintiff to the Baton Rouge office
“The Court finds that nearly all of Defendant’s arguments that Plaintiff was fired for performance related issues are not clearly supported by an employment records…. [E]ach of Defendant’s assertions that Plaintiff was not performing adequately in her position were only asserted after she filed her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claim.”
Zeno v. Livingston Management, Inc
