Labor & Employment Alert An informational bulletin from the Labor & Employment Practice at Goodwin Procter
|
|
- Hugo Barrett
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 January 23, 2004 Labor & Employment Alert An informational bulletin from the Labor & Employment Practice at Goodwin Procter Recent U.S. Supreme Court and Massachusetts SJC Decisions Clarify Disability Discrimination Issues Last month, the United States Supreme Court and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued decisions regarding disability discrimination issues of significant interest to employers. This Alert describes those decisions and their potential impact on employers. Raytheon v. Hernandez The United States Supreme Court s decision in Raytheon Co. v. Hernandez, (December, 2003), addressed important questions regarding claims of disparate treatment and disparate impact under the Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA ). The Court unanimously held that an employer s no re-hire policy, pursuant to which the company refused to re-hire individuals who had left the company due to workplace misconduct, constitutes a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for refusing to re-hire a former employee. The Court, however, left unanswered the question of whether such a policy might, under certain circumstances, give rise to a disparate impact claim. Background The ADA, along with many other antidiscrimination statutes, allows for two broad categories of claims disparate treatment and disparate impact. Disparate treatment is readily understandable. In such a case, plaintiffs seek to prove that their employer has treated them less favorably than others because of their disability. Proof of discriminatory motive is vital in such cases. Disparate impact, by contrast, requires no showing of discriminatory motive. Instead, in a disparate impact case, the plaintiff seeks to prove through statistical evidence that a facially neutral employer policy or requirement adversely affects members of the protected class in a disproportionate manner. In Hernandez, the plaintiff brought a disparate treatment claim against his former employer, Raytheon, after the company refused to re-hire him. Hernandez had worked for Raytheon for over 20 years when, in 1991, he failed a drug test administered after his appearance and behavior at work suggested that he might be under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Upon notification that he had failed the test, Hernandez admitted to the company that he had used cocaine and alcohol the night before and resigned rather than face termination. Over two years later, Hernandez applied for re-hire. Upon receipt of his application, which indicated his prior employment with the company, Raytheon s human resources department reviewed his personnel file. The file contained an Employee Separation Summary, prepared at the time of his resignation, which stated the following as the reason for separation: discharge for personal conduct (quit in lieu of discharge). There was no indication in the file that Hernandez Boston New York New Jersey Washington DC
2 had been addicted to drugs the employment separation summary stated that he had been discharged for violating workplace conduct rules. However, one of the two letters of reference submitted by Hernandez along with his application stated that he regularly attended meetings of Alcoholics Anonymous and was in recovery. Raytheon rejected Hernandez s application because it had a policy against rehiring employees who were terminated for workplace misconduct. After receiving a determination from the EEOC that Raytheon may have rejected [Hernandez s] application based on his record of past alcohol and drug use, Hernandez filed a complaint against Raytheon in federal district court. He alleged that Raytheon refused to re-hire him because of his record of drug addiction or because he was regarded as being a drug addict. In response to Raytheon s motion for summary judgment, Hernandez argued for the first time that, if Raytheon had applied its no re-hire policy to him, it violated the ADA because such policy has a disparate impact on recovering drug addicts. The federal district court granted Raytheon s motion for summary judgment with regard to Hernandez s disparate treatment claim. The court refused to consider his disparate impact claim because he had failed to raise it in a timely manner. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision. Although it agreed with the District Court that Hernandez had not raised a timely disparate impact claim, the Ninth Circuit held that Raytheon s no re-hire policy was not a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for refusing to re-hire him because such policy had a disparate impact on recovering drug addicts and served to ban the re-employment of a drug addict despite his successful rehabilitation. The Supreme Court s Decision Specifically, the Supreme Court agreed to decide the question of whether the ADA confers preferential re-hire rights on disabled employees lawfully terminated for violating workplace conduct rules. The Supreme Court, however, did not address that issue because it concluded that the Ninth Circuit had erred by applying disparate impact analysis to a disparate treatment case. Justice Thomas, writing for a seven-member majority (two justices recused themselves), stated that, had the Ninth Circuit correctly applied the disparatetreatment framework, it would have been obliged to conclude that a neutral re-hire policy is, by definition, a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason under the ADA. Therefore, Raytheon had met its burden of production. In remanding the case back to the lower court, Justice Thomas noted that the only remaining issues were (i) whether Raytheon had, in fact, applied the no re-hire policy to Hernandez and, (ii) whether Hernandez could come forward with any evidence of discriminatory intent on the part of Raytheon. On remand, Hernandez, in the absence of direct evidence of discriminatory intent, would attempt to prove his case through circumstantial evidence, such as evidence showing that Raytheon enforced its no re-hire policy more strictly against alcoholics and drug users than other former employees fired for misconduct. See Flynn v. Raytheon Co., 868 F.Supp. 383 (D. Mass. 1994) (holding that the ADA did not prohibit an employer from firing an alcoholic for violating its policy that no employee report to work intoxicated, provided that it did not enforce that policy more strictly against alcoholics than it did against employees who were not alcoholics). With regard to this issue of discriminatory intent, the Court observed that, if the decisionmaker at Raytheon truly was unaware of Hernandez s alleged disability, i.e., his drug use, it would be impossible for her hiring decision to have been based, even in part, on his alleged disability. Therefore, Hernandez would have no claim for disparate treatment.
3 Comment The Hernandez decision is significant for several reasons. First, the Supreme Court emphatically concluded that a no re-hire policy, neutrally and consistently applied to all employees, is a quintessential legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for refusing to rehire an employee who was terminated for violating workplace conduct rules. The Court did not address the question of whether such a policy might have a disparate impact on former employees who were forced to resign for drug or alcohol use but have since been rehabilitated. Nor did the Court address the larger issue of whether the ADA requires employers to give disabled employees preferential treatment in a re-hire situation. Second, Justice Thomas noted that there was some question as to whether the Ninth Circuit had suggested that, because Hernandez s workplace misconduct (testing positive for cocaine) was related to his disability, Raytheon s refusal to re-hire him based on that misconduct violated the ADA. In a footnote that is likely to be the subject of much discussion in the lower courts, Justice Thomas observed that the Supreme Court has rejected a similar argument in the context of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. In the case cited by Justice Thomas, Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins, 507 U.S. 604 (1993), the Court rejected a plaintiff s argument that his employer s decision to terminate him because his pension (which was calculated based on years of service) was about to vest necessarily meant that such decision was taken on account of his age. Instead, the Court concluded that [b]ecause age and years of service are analytically distinct, an employer can take account of one while ignoring the other, and thus it is incorrect to say that a decision based on years of service is necessarily age based. By citing to Biggins, the Supreme Court appears to be signaling that employers may take disciplinary action against employees because of workplace misconduct, without violating the ADA, even where such misconduct is attributable to an employee s disability. Indeed, many lower federal courts, as well as the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, have held that an employee s disability is no excuse for workplace misconduct. See Garrity v. United Airlines, Inc., 421 Mass. 55 (1995); see also 42 U.S.C (c)(4) (employers may hold alcoholics and illegal drug users to the same standards as other employees). Lastly, the Court s opinion provides some practical litigation insight. The Court noted that the EEOC s probable cause determination may have been based, in part, on the fact that Raytheon s position statement to the EEOC, written by its Manager of Diversity Development, suggested that the person who rejected Hernandez s application had knowledge of his prior drug use. This person later testified, however, that she had no such knowledge. This inconsistency may prove problematic in the eventual trial of the case. Employers should be extremely diligent in preparing their initial responses to agency complaints, and give them the same careful attention they would give to a formal court complaint. City of New Bedford v. MCAD The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court s (December, 2003) decision in City of New Bedford v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination established that an individual s inability to handle stressful aspects of his particular job does not render him handicapped within the meaning of the Massachusetts anti-discrimination statute. The Court also clarified the standard of review of an arbitrator s decision rendered under the auspices of the MCAD s alternative dispute resolution program. Background The case concerned a New Bedford police officer serving on the City s SWAT teams who, in the course of his duties, fatally shot an armed suspect. After spending 12 months on leave pending public and internal
4 investigations, he returned to his regular duties as a police officer. However, the City refused to reinstate the officer to the SWAT teams because he appeared to be under stress and not ready to perform in highrisk situations. The officer filed a complaint with the MCAD charging that the City illegally removed him from the SWAT teams based on a perceived handicap in violation of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 151B. The parties agreed to submit their dispute to binding arbitration under the MCAD s alternative dispute resolution Policy The arbitrator found in favor of the officer and awarded him reinstatement to the special forces teams, back pay with interest, emotional distress damages, punitive damages, and attorney s fees. The City asked the MCAD to set aside the award; the MCAD issued a decision in which it declined to do so and declared the arbitrator s award final. After the City s appeal to the Superior Court was rejected, the City appealed to the SJC. The Court s Decision The Court rejected the officer s contention that the City s challenge should be assessed under the extremely deferential standard of review found in the Commonwealth s Uniform Arbitration Act for Commercial Disputes. Instead, the court looked to whether the MCAD complied with its own Policy 96-1, which requires the MCAD to set aside an arbitrator s decision if it is not in the public interest, or palpably wrong. The SJC concluded that the MCAD committed a clear error of law when it affirmed the arbitrator s award because the arbitrator was palpably wrong to have found the officer to be handicapped under 151B. The Court rejected the MCAD s assertion that judicial review should be limited to whether the agency abused its discretion in upholding the arbitrator s award. In holding that the officer was not handicapped under Chapter 151B, the SJC applied a three-part analysis derived from cases analyzing federal law: (i) whether a plaintiff s condition, actual or perceived, constitutes a mental or physical impairment; (ii) whether the life activity curtailed constitutes a major life activity; and (iii) whether the impairment substantially limits the major life activity. The officer claimed that he was not reinstated to the SWAT teams because he was perceived as being handicapped. In such perception cases the plaintiff must show that his employer believed that he had an impairment that substantially limited a major life activity. With respect to the issue of whether stress constitutes an impairment for purposes of Chapter 151B, the Court stated that stress might be a mental impairment in some cases, and therefore assumed that the plaintiff had established an impairment without deciding the issue. The major life activity at issue in the case was the activity of working. The SJC hinged its decision on the officer s inability to show that his mental impairment substantially limited his ability to work. Relying primarily on MCAD guidelines, the court held that a perceived impairment must preclude a plaintiff from performing a class of jobs. Here, the officer returned to active duty and assumed all of the duties the position demands and was not perceived by his superiors as limited in his ability to perform as an active police officer. The court stated that [a] perception that an employee is unable to perform only a particular aspect (SWAT team membership) of a single, particular job (New Bedford police officer) is not sufficient to satisfy the substantial limitation requirement of the statute. Further, the officer s attempt to recast the major life activity at issue from working to mental and emotional processes such as thinking, concentrating and interacting with others was of no consequence, since there was no evidence that his supervisors perceived him to be substantially limited in that regard. Comment City of New Bedford makes clear that Massachusetts employers do not have a duty
5 to accommodate employees simply because they find certain job duties to be too stressful. The case also sets forth a new standard of review for cases submitted for arbitration under the MCAD s arbitration policy, making clear that the MCAD will be required to set aside any arbitration decisions that are either palpably wrong or not in the public interest. The standard of court review of arbitration decisions under the MCAD s Policy 96-1 is much more stringent than the typical standard of review found, for example, in the Federal Arbitration Act, which provides that a court may overturn an arbitrator only in very limited circumstances, e.g., where the arbitrator was corrupt, partial, guilty of misconduct or exceeded his or her powers. Some federal case law suggests, however, that, in the employment discrimination context, an arbitrator s decision interpreting a statute (as opposed to a collective bargaining agreement) should be reviewed more carefully to determine whether the arbitrator s decision is in manifest disregard of the law and indicates that the standard must be sufficiently rigorous to permit a determination of whether the arbitrator properly interpreted and applied statutory law. This was the holding of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in a 1997 case, Cole v. Burns International Security Svcs. The City of New Bedford case, coupled with the federal Cole doctrine, may eventually lead to greater judicial scrutiny of all arbitration decisions concerning Massachusetts employment discrimination claims, not just those conducted under the MCAD s auspices. Employers should be aware of this potential standard of review when they evaluate the pros and cons of implementing arbitration agreements with their employees in an effort to obtain quick and inexpensive binding resolution of any statutory disputes that may arise outside of the collective bargaining agreement context. For more information on these decisions and their potential implications for your business, please contact: Wilfred J. Benoit, P.C. wbenoit@goodwinprocter.com Robert M. Hale rhale@goodwinprocter.com James W. Nagle, P.C. jnagle@goodwinprocter.com Joseph A. Piacquad jpiacquad@goodwinprocter.com Bradford J. Smith, P.C. bsmith@goodwinprocter.com Albert J. Solecki, Jr. asolecki@goodwinprocter.com Full access to all articles on labor and employment law prepared by Goodwin Procter is available at: Full access to all articles prepared by Goodwin Procter is available at: This publication, which may be considered advertising under the ethical rules of certain jurisdictions, is provided with the understanding that it does not constitute the rendering of legal advice or other professional advice by Goodwin Procter LLP or its attorneys Goodwin Procter LLP. All rights reserved.
The Civil Rights Act of 1991
Page 1 of 18 The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission The Civil Rights Act of 1991 EDITOR'S NOTE: The text of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (Pub. L. 102-166), as enacted on November 21, 1991, appears
More informationCase 5:12-cv LS Document 1 Filed 03/19/12 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 5:12-cv-01380-LS Document 1 Filed 03/19/12 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION LEIF HENRY, : : No. Plaintiff : : v. : : CITY OF
More informationCase 2:16-cv JTM-TJJ Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Case 2:16-cv-02339-JTM-TJJ Document 1 Filed 05/25/16 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ASIA BLUNT ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. v. ) ) PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ) KANSAS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION CHARLES TAYLOR ) 1524 NOVA AVENUE ) CAPITOL HEIGHTS, MD 20743 ) ) ) ) Individually and as ) Class Representative ) ) PLAINTIFF )
More informationEmployment Application
Employment Application Applicants are considered for all positions without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender, sexual/gender identity, national origin, age, marital
More informationJ. SCOTT DYER, FAGIE HARTMAN, JULIE LEVY AND KATE WHITE
SUPREME COURT ELIMINATES THE CONTINUING VIOLATION THEORY IN EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CASES, FOR ALL BUT HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT CLAIMS J. SCOTT DYER, FAGIE HARTMAN, JULIE LEVY AND KATE WHITE JULY 8, 2002
More informationCase 5:14-cv DAE Document 4 Filed 11/10/14 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:14-cv-00801-DAE Document 4 Filed 11/10/14 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action
More informationNon-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy
Revisions Adopted by President s Cabinet March 27, 2018 Adopted by President s Cabinet August 23, 2016 Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policy Policy Statement: East Georgia State College affirms
More informationEmployer Liability and Title VII: Recent U.S. Supreme Court Guidance on Supervisor Conduct and Retaliation
Employer Liability and Title VII: Recent U.S. Supreme Court Guidance on Supervisor Conduct and Retaliation Presented by Jonathan S. Parritz Maslon Edelman Borman & Brand, LLP jon.parritz@maslon.com p 612.672.8334
More informationSenate Bill 301 Ordered by the Senate May 4 Including Senate Amendments dated May 4
th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--0 Regular Session A-Engrossed Senate Bill 0 Ordered by the Senate May Including Senate Amendments dated May Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule. by order of the President
More informationCorrected f. EY. Rule la:l. Admission to Practice in This Commonwealth Without Examination.
Corrected f. EY VIRGINIA: - tq;o/~o-n Friday ~ 13th ~o/ December, 2013. It is ordered that the Rules heretofore adopted and promulgated by this Court and now in effect be and they hereby are amended to
More informationPROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TEXAS DISCIPLINARY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT LINDA ACEVEDO, Austin State Bar of Texas State Bar of Texas 36 TH ANNUAL ADVANCED FAMILY LAW COURSE August 9-12, 2010 San Antonio
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA SANDRA DILAURA and : Civil Action No. 03-2200 JEFFREY DILAURA, w/h, and : THE UNITED STATES EQUAL : EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY : COMMISSION,
More informationEPLI Claims in the 5 th Circuit
EPLI Claims in the 5 th Circuit Presented by Charles H. Wilson Vice Chair, Office Managing Partner Cozen O Connor, P.C. (713) 750-3117 Cwilson@cozen.com What are we going to cover today? Overview of applicable
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:11-cv-00101-L Document 1 Filed 02/03/11 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1) SATERA WASHINGTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No. v. ) ) (2)
More informationCONDUCTING LAWFUL AND EFFECTIVE INVESTIGATIONS REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT
CONDUCTING LAWFUL AND EFFECTIVE INVESTIGATIONS REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT By Jennifer C. McGarey Secretary and Assistant General Counsel US Airways, Inc. and Tom A. Jerman O
More informationA Live 90-Minute Audio Conference with Interactive Q&A
presents Ricci v. DeStefano: Balancing Title VII Disparate Treatment and Disparate Impact Leveraging the Supreme Court's Guidance on Employment Testing and its Impact on Voluntary Compliance Actions A
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA I. SUMMARY
HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON JAMES H. BRYAN, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA Plaintiff, WAL-MART STORES, INC., Defendant. I. SUMMARY CASE NO. C- RBL ORDER GRANTING
More informationTHE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE BILL
PRINTER'S NO. 1 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE BILL No. Session of 01 INTRODUCED BY COHEN, BISHOP, V. BROWN, CALTAGIRONE, P. DALEY, HARKINS, KORTZ, MAHONEY, MOLCHANY, O'BRIEN AND THOMAS, APRIL
More informationNOTICE. 1. SUBJECT: Enforcement Guidance on St. Mary s Honor Center v. Hicks, U.S., 113 S. Ct. 2742, 61 EPD 42,322 (1993).
EEOC NOTICE Number 915.002 Date 4/12/94 1. SUBJECT: Enforcement Guidance on St. Mary s Honor Center v. Hicks, U.S., 113 S. Ct. 2742, 61 EPD 42,322 (1993). 2. PURPOSE: This document discusses the decision
More informationBYLAWS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF ALCOHOLISM AND DRUG ABUSE COUNSELORS ADOPTED. October 4, 1988 REVISED
BYLAWS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA ASSOCIATION OF ALCOHOLISM AND DRUG ABUSE COUNSELORS ADOPTED October 4, 1988 REVISED September 26, 1989 April 4, 1990 October 18, 1990 April 4, 1991 April 27, 1992 October 4,
More informationExecutive Order No. 131
Executive Order No. 131 Establishing Administrative Adjudication Plans WHEREAS, administrative adjudication was developed to provide expert, efficient, timely and fair resolution of claims, rights and
More informationPUBLIC SERVICE ACT 1995 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1- PRELIMINARY
PUBLIC SERVICE ACT 1995 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1- PRELIMINARY Section 1. Short title and Commencement 2. Object of the Act 3. Application 4. Interpretation 5. Act is ancillary to the Constitution
More informationThe Civil Rights Act of 1991
The Civil Rights Act of 1991 EDITOR'S NOTE: The text of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (Pub. L. 102-166), as enacted on November 21, 1991, appears below with the following modifications: 1. The text of the
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 15-60764 Document: 00513714839 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/12/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, United States Court of Appeals Fifth
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:04-cv-02686-WDM-CBS Document 314 Filed 02/06/2009 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-cv-02686-WDM-CBS WAYNE TOMLINSON,
More informationMISSOURI S LAWYER DISCIPLINE SYSTEM
MISSOURI S LAWYER DISCIPLINE SYSTEM Discipline System Clients have a right to expect a high level of professional service from their lawyer. In Missouri, lawyers follow a code of ethics known as the Rules
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
2:16-cv-13540-GAD-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 10/03/16 Pg 1 of 9 Pg ID 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, Civil
More informationCriminal Offender Record Information CORI ACCESS and REFORM
Criminal ffender Record Information CRI ACCESS and REFRM CRI utline What is a CRI? Who can pull a CRI? btaining your own CRI Sealing records Correcting inaccurate records Employment and CRI Housing and
More informationLEDBETTER V. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO.
LEDBETTER V. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. Derrick A. Bell, Jr. * Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. 1 illustrates two competing legal interpretations of Title VII and the body of law it provokes. In
More informationInvestments, Life Insurance & Superannuation Terms of Reference
Investments, Life Insurance & Superannuation Terms of Reference These Terms of Reference apply to those members of the Financial Ombudsman Service Limited who have been designated as having the Investments,
More informationARBITRATION AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO RESOLVING DISPUTES ARISING IN THE WORKPLACE
ARBITRATION AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO RESOLVING DISPUTES ARISING IN THE WORKPLACE Provided by David J. Comeaux Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, LLC Hospitality Law H L C 2004 Conference When
More informationAmici in support of plaintiff-appellant
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT FAR NO. 17039 Yong Li, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Raytheon Company, and others Defendants - Appellees. IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANT S APPLICATION FOR FURTHER
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 113,928. In the Matter of ELIZABETH ANNE HUEBEN, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 113,928 In the Matter of ELIZABETH ANNE HUEBEN, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE Original proceeding in discipline. Opinion filed October 30,
More informationWHEN DISCRETION MEANS DENIAL: Criminal Records Barriers to Federally Subsidized Housing. October 26, 2016 Housing Action Illinois Conference
WHEN DISCRETION MEANS DENIAL: Criminal Records Barriers to Federally Subsidized Housing October 26, 2016 Housing Action Illinois Conference Criminal Records & Public Safety There is NO empirical evidence
More informationH 7024 S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D
LC000 01 -- H 0 S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D IN GENERAL ASSEMBLY JANUARY SESSION, A.D. 01 A N A C T RELATING TO LABOR AND LABOR RELATIONS -- HEALTHY WORKPLACE Introduced By: Representatives O'Brien,
More informationNinth Circuit Denies Insurer's Gamble on Vacatur in Nevada
Arbitration Law Review Volume 3 Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation Article 18 7-1-2011 Ninth Circuit Denies Insurer's Gamble on Vacatur in Nevada Emma M. Kline Follow this and additional works at: http://elibrary.law.psu.edu/arbitrationlawreview
More informationCase 2:16-cv GMN-VCF Document 1 Filed 04/26/16 Page 1 of 10
Case :-cv-00-gmn-vcf Document Filed 0// Page of JOSEPH A. GUTIERREZ, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 COLLIN M. JAYNE, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. MAIER GUTIERREZ AYON 00 South Seventh Street, Suite 00 Las Vegas, Nevada
More informationCase 2:16-cv Document 20 Filed 02/23/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 150 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Case 2:16-cv-10696 Document 20 Filed 02/23/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 150 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION CMH HOMES, INC. Petitioner, v.
More informationWin One, Lose One: A New Defense for California
Win One, Lose One: A New Defense for California 9/15/2001 Employment + Labor and Litigation Client Alert This Commentary highlights two recent developments in California employment law: (1) the recent
More informationThe following article was published in Fall 1995 about six months after the decision in City of Edmonds, WA v. Oxford House, Inc.
The following article was published in Fall 1995 about six months after the decision in City of Edmonds, WA v. Oxford House, Inc. 514 US 725 (1995) The Law & The Land: The City of Edmonds Case Matthew
More informationCase 1:11-cv NMG Document 1 Filed 10/19/11 Page 1 of 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:11-cv-11850-NMG Document 1 Filed 10/19/11 Page 1 of 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS JOSEPH E. ZAVATSKY, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. ) JOHN O'BRIEN, ELIZABETH
More informationAdopted: August 1996 Wheaton ISD #803 Policy 402 Orig Revised: November 2018
Adopted: August 1996 Wheaton ISD #803 Policy 402 Orig. 1995 Revised: November 2018 402 DISABILITY NONDISCRIMINATION POLICY I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to provide a fair employment setting
More informationThis Court properly reserved ruling on the issue of. survival of M.G.L. c. 151B claims in Alba v. Raytheon, 441
I. A conclusion that a plaintiff s discrimination claim survives his death is consistent with this Court s decision in Alba v. Raytheon and with the superior court s decision in Rowley v. Associates for
More informationCase 2:15-cv CMR Document 6 Filed 03/28/16 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:15-cv-06132-CMR Document 6 Filed 03/28/16 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL MACDONALD Plaintiff, v. Case No. 2:15-cv-06132-CMR JURY
More informationEMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998
EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 [View Regulation] [ASSENTED TO 12 OCTOBER, 1998] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 DECEMBER, 1999] (Unless otherwise indicated) (English text signed by the President) This Act
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, SS. ) JACQUELINE CREAVEN, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) CITY OF BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, ) ED DAVIS, in his official capacity as Boston ) Police Commissioner and in his individual
More informationFrequently Asked Questions about EEOC Guidance on Consideration of Criminal History
Frequently Asked Questions about EEOC Guidance on Consideration of Criminal History Texas law precludes school district employment for persons with certain criminal history. The federal Equal Employment
More informationNOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CLASS ACTION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) NICOLE COGDELL, et al., ) ) Case No. SACV 12-01138 AG (ANx) Plaintiffs, ) ) Honorable Andrew J. Guilford v. ) ) THE WET SEAL,
More informationIt is the responsibility of all Fletcher Personnel to understand and comply with this Policy, including any reporting requirements set out below.
POLICY: ANTI-BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION 1. POLICY STATEMENT AND PURPOSE Fletcher Building Limited ( Fletcher Building ) is committed to complying with the law in all jurisdictions in which we operate, as well
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND DIVISION KESEANDA BROOKS, ) ) Case No. Plaintiff, ) ) Hon. v. ) Magistrate ) MEDICAL FACILITIES OF ) AMERICA, INC., d/b/a HANOVER ) HEALTH
More information2015 Employment Law Practice Tips
2015 Employment Law Practice Tips November 2015 Shelley I. Ericsson Sources of Rules Laws/Regulations Policies Agreements Guidelines Employment-At-Will Working arrangements not governed by collective bargaining
More information2015 Employment Law Practice Tips
2015 Employment Law Practice Tips November 2015 Shelley I. Ericsson Sources of Rules Laws/Regulations Policies Agreements Guidelines Employment At Will Working arrangements not governed by collective bargaining
More informationGianfranco Caprio v. Secretary Transp
2009 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 9-10-2009 Gianfranco Caprio v. Secretary Transp Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 08-2555
More informationMarie v. Allied Home Mortgage Corp.
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS Marie v. Allied Home Mortgage Corp. I. INTRODUCTION The First Circuit Court of Appeals' recent decision in Marie v. Allied Home Mortgage Corp., 1 regarding the division of labor between
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiffs CRIMINAL DOCKET CR-09-351 BRIAN DUNN V. HON. RICHARD P. CONABOY Defendant SENTENCING MEMORANDUM
More informationYou means the associate signing this document and any other person who asserts that associate s rights.
RAYMOUR & FLANIGAN EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION PROGRAM TERMS This Program is a contract between Raymour & Flanigan and you governing how employment-related disputes are to be resolved. It is an essential, required
More informationGovernance Policy. Adopted December 2, 2011
Governance Policy Adopted December 2, 2011 Governance Policy Purpose The Rules and Regulations of the TVA Retirement System ( Rules and Regulations ) governing the operations of the Tennessee Valley Authority
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Frank, Beales and Senior Judge Bumgardner Argued at Alexandria, Virginia TOMMY L. HARMON, JR. MEMORANDUM OPINION BY v. Record No. 0694-11-4 JUDGE RUDOLPH BUMGARDNER,
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit RICHARD A. KOESTER, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES PARK POLICE, Respondent 2017-2613 Petition for review of
More informationSuperintendent Procedure 3210SP.B Discrimination Complaint Process Approved by: s/ Larry Nyland Date: 3/8/18 Dr. Larry Nyland, Superintendent
Superintendent Procedure 3210SP.B Discrimination Complaint Process Approved by: s/ Larry Nyland Date: 3/8/18 Dr. Larry Nyland, Superintendent A. INTRODUCTION The District is committed to nondiscrimination
More informationMUTUAL AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE
MUTUAL AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE 1. Effective Date and Acceptance Date The effective date of this Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Claims ( Agreement ) is 5/30/2017. Company and Claimant mutually agree to resolve
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BUREAU OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPEALS RULING ON MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA. A. Introduction
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BUREAU OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPEALS In Re: Albert 1 and Boston Public Schools BSEA # 06-6508 RULING ON MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA A. Introduction This Ruling addresses Student
More informationU.S. SUPREME COURT DOCKET CHART 2015 TERM October 18 October 24. Amicus cases = yellow highlight Petitions scheduled for conference green highlight
U.S. SUPREME COURT DOCKET CHART 2015 TERM October 18 October 24 Amicus cases = yellow highlight Petitions scheduled for conference green highlight CASE/DOCKET NO./LOWER COURT MOST RECENT PETITIONS FOR
More informationXX... 3 TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION... 3 CHAPTER 819. TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION... 4
XX.... 3 TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION... 3 CHAPTER 819. TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION... 4 SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS... 4 819.1. Purpose... 4 819.2. Definitions... 4 819.3. Roles
More informationPrompt Remedial Action and Waiver of Privilege
Prompt Remedial Action and Waiver of Privilege by Monica L. Goebel and John B. Nickerson Workplace Harassment In order to avoid liability for workplace harassment, an employer must show that it exercised
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION AMANDA TAYLOR, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 4:18-cv-701 ) VITAMIN COTTAGE NATURAL ) FOOD MARKETS, INC. a/k/a
More informationTITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964
TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is the text of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88-352) (Title VII), as amended, as it appears in volume 42 of the
More informationAre Arbitrators Right Even When They Are Wrong?: Second Circuit Upholds Arbitral Ruling Allowing Implicit Reference to Class Arbitration
Arbitration Law Review Volume 4 Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation Article 26 7-1-2012 Are Arbitrators Right Even When They Are Wrong?: Second Circuit Upholds Arbitral Ruling Allowing Implicit Reference
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Deanna Richert, Civil File No. 09-cv-00763 (ADM/JJK) Plaintiff, v. ANSWER National Arbitration Forum, LLC, and Dispute Management Services, LLC, d/b/a
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: U. S. (1999) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 98 208 CAROLE KOLSTAD, PETITIONER v. AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT
More informationATTORNEY ADVISOR GS /15 EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW (Falls Church, VA) VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: EOIR POSITION
ATTORNEY ADVISOR GS-905-14/15 EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW (Falls Church, VA) VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: EOIR-14-0023 1 POSITION About the Office: The Executive Office for Immigration Review,
More informationSAN JOAQUIN COUNTY EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY OFFICE
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY OFFICE Informational Guidelines For Employees On The Process Of Filing A Complaint Under Civil Service Rule 20 On December 11, 2012, the Board of Supervisors
More informationOffice of Equal Opportunity Procedures I. PURPOSE
Office of Equal Opportunity Procedures 2013-2014 I. PURPOSE The Office of Equal Opportunity establishes these Procedures to assist in carrying out its responsibilities in the administration and enforcement
More informationThe Role of Counsel Pursuant to Section 3 of the Substitute Decisions Act. Trusts and Estates Division of the Ontario Bar Association
The Role of Counsel Pursuant to Section 3 of the Substitute Decisions Act Trusts and Estates Division of the Ontario Bar Association November 24, 2009 D ARCY HILTZ 1 Section 3 of the Substitute Decisions
More informationTexas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas. Texas State Bar Ethics Rules HIGHLIGHTS (SELECTED EXCERPTS)
Texas State Bar Ethics Rules Highlights Page 1 of 8 Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of Texas Texas State Bar Ethics Rules HIGHLIGHTS (SELECTED EXCERPTS) [Page 7] Rule
More informationSEXUAL MISCONDUCT INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES
Policy #62002.1 The purposes of these procedures are to provide Grambling State University with a clear set of guidelines to follow when investigating a report of sexual misconduct. STEPS 1. Formal Complaint
More informationDiscrimination and Harassment Complaints and Investigations Administrative Procedure (3435)
Discrimination and Harassment Complaints and Investigations Administrative Procedure (3435) Complaints The law prohibits coworkers, supervisors, managers, and third parties with whom an employee comes
More informationOREGON DPSST ETHICS BULLETIN Volume No. 99
OREGON DPSST ETHICS BULLETIN Volume No. 99 The Board on Public Safety Standards and Training (BPSST) has the legislative mandate to establish and enforce minimum standards for all law enforcement officers,
More informationSTATE OF MAINE Cumbe ic:1r1'j, ::s. Clerk's Office JAN RECEIVED
STATE OF MAINE CUMBERLAND, ss SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. CV-16-319 SUSAN SNOW, Plaintiff V. ORDER BERNSTEIN, SHUR, SA WYER & NELSON, P.A., et al., Defendants STATE OF MAINE Cumbe ic:1r1'j,
More informationBy Judith J. Johnson* I. Introduction. courts generally have been so hostile to ADA plaintiffs that it is difficult now to find a
RESCUE THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT FROM RESTRICTIVE INTERPRETATIONS: ALCOHOLISM AS AN ILLUSTRATION By Judith J. Johnson* We alcoholics are men and women who have lost the ability to control our
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 00-CO Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. (Hon. Hiram Puig-Lugo, Trial Judge)
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
More informationUNIFORMED SERVICES EMPLOYMENT AND REEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT OF 1994
UNIFORMED SERVICES EMPLOYMENT AND REEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT OF 1994 USERRA is a federal statute that protects servicemembers and veterans civilian employment rights. Among other things, under certain conditions,
More informationF L O R I D A H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S HB
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A bill to be entitled An act relating to safe work environments; providing a short title; providing legislative findings and purposes;
More informationGOVERNMENT GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA. N$11.60 WINDHOEK - 26 June 2012 No. 4973
GOVERNMENT GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA N$11.60 WINDHOEK - 26 June 2012 No. 4973 CONTENTS Page GOVERNMENT NOTICE No. 156 Promulgation of Property Valuers Profession Act, 2012 (Act No. 7 of 2012),
More informationEEOC v. Oglethorpe University
Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Consent Decrees Labor and Employment Law Program 5-2-2007 EEOC v. Oglethorpe University Judge Orinda Evans Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec
More informationApplication for Employment
Application for Employment Today s Date Your Personal Information Name Last First Middle Address City State Zip Code Home Telephone Cellular Telephone E-Mail Address Preferred Method of Contact: Home Telephone
More informationAPPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT
APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT We appreciate your interest. We are an equal employment opportunity employer. Our policy is not to discriminate against any applicant or employee based on race, color, sex, religion,
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 11-1774 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United
More informationStudent and Employment Discrimination Complaint Procedures Legal Opinion 16-03
STATE OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES CHANCELLOR S OFFICE 1102 Q STREET, SUITE 4554 SACRAMENTO, CA 95811-6549 (916) 445-8752 http://www.cccco.edu ERIK SKINNER, ACTING CHANCELLOR OFFICE OF GENERAL
More informationRivera v. Continental Airlines
2003 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-9-2003 Rivera v. Continental Airlines Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket 01-3653 Follow this
More informationACT. (Signed by the President on 9 June 2012) ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS
(GG 4973) This Act has been passed by Parliament, but it has not yet been brought into force. It will come into force on a date set by the Minister in the Government Gazette. ACT To provide for the establishment
More informationFamily Medical Leave Act Decisions
Family Medical Leave Act Decisions Frances E. Baillon & Dustin Massie Baillon Thome Jozwiak & Wanta LLP Denial of Leave Request following Exhaustion of FMLA Is Not Discriminatory Hasenwinkel v. Mosaic
More informationEmployment Application
Today s Date Employment Application 424 Prescott St. Greensboro, NC 27401 336-272-4400 This is a Drug-Free Workplace Offering Equal Employment Opportunities YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION Last Name First Name
More informationBaker v. Hunter Douglas Inc
2008 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 3-19-2008 Baker v. Hunter Douglas Inc Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 06-5149 Follow this
More informationCase 3:15-cv SI Document 23 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
Case 3:15-cv-01389-SI Document 23 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON HEATHER ANDERSON, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:15-cv-01389-SI OPINION AND ORDER v.
More informationCODES OF GOOD PRACTICE Pursuant to section 15(1)(a) of the Public Service Act , I, PAKALITHA BETHUEL MOSISILI
CODES OF GOOD PRACTICE 2005 Pursuant to section 15(1) of the Public Service Act 2005 1, I, PAKALITHA BETHUEL MOSISILI Prime Minister of Lesotho and Minister responsible for public service, make the following
More information111TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION S. 181 AN ACT
TH CONGRESS ST SESSION S. AN ACT To amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of, and to modify the operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 0 and
More informationEMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998
EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 [ASSENTED TO 12 OCTOBER, 1998] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 DECEMBER, 1999] (Unless otherwise indicated) (English text signed by the President) This Act has been updated
More informationAASB BOARDMANSHIP SERIES DEVELOPING EXCELLENT SCHOOL BOARD LEADERS THROUGH
AASB BOARDMANSHIP SERIES DEVELOPING EXCELLENT SCHOOL BOARD LEADERS THROUGH QUALITY TRAINING, ADVOCACY AND SERVICES PROBATIONARY & CONTRACT PRINCIPALS THIRD EDITION 2017 www.alabamaschoolboards.org Published
More information