Eight years ago, Maryland’s Reasonable Accommodations for Pregnant Workers Act (“RAPWA”) , which went into effect on October 1, 2013, did not exist, and the United Parcel Service (“UPS”) denied a pregnant Maryland employee’s request to lift no more than 20 pounds at work on the written advisement of her doctor.
(One of the trademarks registered to Pro Football, Inc. d/b/a/ The Washington Redskins)
On Wednesday, the United States Patent And Trademark Office (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board or “TTAB”) canceled the Washington Redskins’ trademark registrations in the start of what is likely to be a lengthy legal battle.
Can an employer be liable for racist and sexist comments by a client or business partner—someone who does not even work for the employer—toward one of its employees?
Under a recent decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, the answer is “yes.” In Freeman v. Dal-Tile Corp., a decision issued on April 29, 2014, the Fourth Circuit recognized that an employer can be liable for harassment perpetrated by a third-party against one of its employees.
The President’s Executive Order on Non-Retaliation for Disclosure of Compensation Information: How it will affect federal contractors and their employees
On April 8, 2014, President Barack Obama signed an Executive Order prohibiting federal government contractors from retaliating against employees for disclosing their own or other employees’ salary information. This post will explore the implications of this new Executive Order for federal contractors and their employees.
While in law school, I was often asked what area of law I was interested in practicing. Inevitably someone would ask me if I was interested in becoming a family law attorney. My almost instantaneous response was, “Oh no! Too much drama!” Instead, I chose to practice employment law – an area that I naively believed would have fewer emotions involved than Family law.
What was thought by many practitioners and many in the news media to be one of the most significantly restrictive Supreme Court decisions on class actions in recent memory, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, may not be so formidable for plaintiffs seeking redress through the class action process.
On October 1, 2013, the Reasonable Accommodations for Pregnant Workers Act (“RAPWA”) became effective and applies to Maryland employers who have fifteen (15) or more employees. Taking the lead from laws like that Americans with Disabilities Act, the new RAPWA will require employers to provide reasonable accommodations for employees with a disability caused by, or contributed to, by a pregnancy.
Kathy: Jeremy, I know a large part of your practice involves whistleblower law. Do you have any thoughts or advice to pass along on this topic to our readers?
Retaliation Claims Under the False Claims Act: “But For” or “Mixed Motive” Causation Standard? How to Prove Illegal Retaliation For Reporting Fraud on Government Contracts.
This past term, the Supreme Court in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar held that retaliation claims under Title VII are required to be decided by what is known as the “But For” causation standard. So, if an employee reports illegal discrimination or harassment based on race, sex, or other Title VII protected conduct and suffers retaliation, the Supreme Court held that the employee must show that “but for” engaging in protected activity (reporting the illegal conduct), the employee would not have suffered the adverse action (such as termination).
Kathy: Every year brings new legislation that impacts American employers and employees. Are there any game-changing laws that have been passed or that are on the horizon for 2013?
This blog is for general informational purposes only. Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA is a law firm and some of the information on the blog relates to legal topics. Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA does not offer or dispense legal advice through this blog or by e-mails directed to or from this site. By using the blog, the reader agrees that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between the reader and Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, PA or its attorneys. The blog is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney licensed in your state. The information on the blog may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. While the blog is revised on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. The opinions expressed at or through the blog are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney. The JGL Law Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service in Circular 230, we inform you that any tax advice contained on this site (including any links provided) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed in this communication.