Tagged: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)

The New EEOC Guidance Regarding Criminal Background Checks

On Wednesday, April 25, 2012, the Equal Employment Opportunity Community issued its long awaited Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, updating and clarifying its prior guidance on the subject. The good news? Employers may continue to use criminal background checks as a screening tool for applicants and employees. However, employers are specifically discouraged from asking about a criminal record on the application and are encouraged to conduct an individualized assessment of the applicant/employee when job exclusion occurs because of a criminal record. Employers should review their policies to ensure compliance with the EEOC’s latest recommendations.

EEOC Publishes New ADEA Regulations for the “Reasonable Factors Other Than Age” Defense

The Equal Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) today published its final regulations and commentary concerning the “reasonable factors other than age” provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (“ADEA”), as that provision pertains to claims of disparate impact. A disparate impact claim is one that alleges that the implementation by an employer of a policy or practice, although non-discriminatory on its face, has had an adverse impact on a category of employees protected by the laws against discrimination in employment.

Supreme Court Recognizes “Ministerial Exception” to Anti-Discrimination Laws

On January 11, 2012, the United States Supreme Court for the first time recognized the so-called “ministerial exception” to workplace discrimination laws. In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Court unanimously found that the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment bar wrongful termination suits brought on behalf of “ministers” against their churches. While this decision is helpful for religious group employers, including religious schools and places of worship, the Court left open the important question of which employees actually qualify as a “ministers.” Accordingly, the decision may create some confusion for religious group employers going forward.

The Gibbons Employment Academy Webinar Series – Disability and Reasonable Accommodations

The second program in our Gibbons Employment Academy Webinar Series, focusing on Disability and Reasonable Accommodations, is scheduled for next Wednesday, June 29, from 8:30 to 10:30 am. The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 and the EEOC’s recently issued regulations explaining and implementing that Act have been widely touted as significantly expanding the definition of disability. It is anticipated that as a result of the Act, more employees than ever before will be considered disabled and will be seeking accommodations. Employers must understand what is deemed a disability under the law and what steps are necessary when employees request accommodations for their disabilities. The webinar will explore these topics as well as provide a survey of accommodations that have been deemed reasonable and those that have not.

Supreme Court Broadens Retaliation Lawsuits Under Title VII

The U.S. Supreme Court has just decided that an employer cannot “get back” at an employee who has complained about discrimination by going after other employees related to, or in a close relationship with, the complaining employee. By ruling in favor of a man who was fired after his fiancée complained about alleged sex discrimination at the same company, the Court’s decision in Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP has expanded Title VII anti-retaliation jurisprudence to encompass employees who themselves do not engage in “protected activity” as defined by the statute. Finding that the fiancée fell within the “zone of interests” of protection afforded by Title VII, he thus qualified as a “person aggrieved with standing to sue.” The decision is significant for employers because it establishes important precedent authorizing retaliation claims by employees other than the employee who made the original complaint of discrimination. Employers should make sure that their written anti-retaliation policies make clear to managers and supervisors that, after a claim of discrimination has been made, it is against company policy to retaliate not only against the employee making the claim but against any employee related to, or in a close relationship with, the complaining party.

Focus on Training in 2011

2011 should be the year in which all companies renew their commitment to training employees. Specifically, all employees should be trained on important company policies, such as the anti-harassment and discrimination policies, and human resources employees and supervisors should be trained on consistently problematic topics such as performance management, accommodating disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act and leaves under the Family and Medical Leave Act and similar state laws.

EEOC Issues Final Rule for the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA)

The EEOC issued its final rule implementing Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (“GINA”) and provided background information regarding the new regulations, which shall take effect on January 10, 2011. GINA generally restricts employers and other covered entities from deliberate acquisition of genetic information, prohibits use of genetic information in employment decision-making, and strictly limits disclosure of genetic information.