A decision issued on October 22, 2015, denying an employer’s motion to dismiss a retaliatory discharge claim brought under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and state anti-discrimination laws offers two important lessons for employers:
The Michigan Court of Appeals sent a strong message that employment lawsuits should not be analogous to a Rorschach test, i.e., subject to interpretation.
Instead, there are certain fundamental pleading requirements that must be alleged in order to state a claim; Failing to follow these requirements may result in a dismissal of the claim. The decision also highlights an important distinction between race-based discrimination and a hostile work environment based on race.
Employers and their HR professionals may want to sit down before reading on: If a manager in your company text messages a picture of his “fully erect penis” to an employee and then fires that employee the day after she brings this to your attention, you will probably be sued. In other news, water tends
For many, sharing on Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, and other social media-related websites is a daily routine. But what happens to that routine when a person becomes involved in litigation? This is a question that almost always has to be answered in the context of employment discrimination lawsuits.
The answer to this question, however
Is An Employer Liable for Harassment by non-employees? This question was inspired by a recent discrimination lawsuit (PDF) filed by a Michigan nurse against her employer, Hurley Medical Center in Flint, Michigan. The lawsuit claims the employer agreed to a man’s request that no African-Americans care for his newborn baby.
While most parents of newborns would