Latest Blog Posts


March 30, 2016 9:02 AM | Posted by Tara Bailes
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) requires that, before a class is certified, a district court must find that questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over questions affecting only individual members.” In a recent decision by the Supreme Court, the majority explained that “[i]n a case where representative evidence is relevant in proving a plaintiff’s individual claim, that evidence cannot be deemed improper because the claim is brought on behalf of a class.” Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, et al., No. 14-1146, 2016 WL 1092414 (S. Ct. 2016).
March 18, 2016 2:25 PM | Posted by Madison Fischer
When an employee or former employee files a charge of discrimination against their employer, the EEOC has the authority to investigate. As part of the investigation, the EEOC asks the employer to submit a position statement explaining its side of the story.
February 5, 2016 1:19 PM | Posted by Jamie Cotter
In a nutshell – Last week, the EEOC unveiled its proposal to seek increased amounts of data from large employers in a stated effort to “combat the persistent gender gap in employee compensation.” Practically, the proposal revises the EEO-1 form. The EEOC’s proposed changes to the EEO-1 form will require all employers with 100 or more employees to submit the new EEO-1 form and provide substantial information regarding pay ranges and hours worked as well as salary data by race, gender and ethnicity.
January 25, 2016 10:33 AM | Posted by Brian Peterson
On Wednesday, January 20, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) released an administrator’s interpretation that is intended to provide guidance to employers on the WHD’s position on the joint-employer standard under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act.
December 21, 2015 4:11 PM | Posted by Andrew Brought
On December 17, 2015, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a major new initiative to increase the number of criminal charges in worker endangerment and worker safety cases. Although the DOJ and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have had a worker endangerment initiative for a number of years, the new changes are intended to bolster the likelihood and number of criminal prosecutions which historically have languished, according to DOJ, due to the OSH Act’s misdemeanor criminal provisions.
November 16, 2015 3:09 PM | Posted by Brian Peterson
On October 27, 2015, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District issued an opinion holding that sexual orientation was not a protected category under the Missouri Human Rights Act (“MHRA”) and, as a result, the plaintiff’s sexual orientation discrimination claim was not cognizable under Missouri law. See Pittman v. Cook Paper Recycling Corp., 2015 WL 6468372 (Mo. App. W.D. Oct. 27, 2015). However, Judge Gabbert wrote a lengthy dissenting opinion and the majority opinion identified but declined to reach the question of whether a claim for sexual orientation discrimination would be actionable under the MHRA if the claim is framed as a claim for unlawful sex-based stereotyping.