On March 18, 2019, landmark legislation was passed that could dramatically impact the resolution of discrimination, retaliation, and harassment claims. under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”), and “other” statutes – presently undefined. Employers: pay close attention. The bill takes effect immediately and applies “to all contracts and agreements entered into, renewed, modified, or … Continue Reading
There are myriad special rules for employers operating in California, and even more were signed into law last term. 2018 was Jerry Brown’s last year of his second “two-term” round as governor. Both legislatively and judicially, 2018 was a busy year, with the legislature sending more than 1,000 bills to the governor. This GT Alert … Continue Reading
New York State and New York City have passed new legislation in an effort to strengthen prohibitions against sexual harassment in the workplace. Last month, we reported on those new developments (See GT Alert, “New Anti-Sexual Harassment Compliance Mandates for New York State and New York City in Full Swing,” September 2018). By Oct. 9, … Continue Reading
Marvin A. Kirsner authored an article in Corporate Counsel titled “Sexual Harassment Settlements With Nondisclosure Agreement No Longer Deductible.” The article explores a provision in the new Tax Cuts and Jobs Act which updates the tax code so that payments made for sexual harassment or abuse claims are no longer tax deductible if the settlement … Continue Reading
A provision in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Tax Act will increase the “after-tax cost” for companies to settle “sexual harassment” or “sexual abuse” claims if they wish to maintain a “nondisclosure agreement” of the details. The law will disallow a business deduction for the amounts paid to settle such claims (including attorneys’ fees) if … Continue Reading
Characterizing its own precedent as “inconsistent” and “confusing,” the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in a published opinion earlier this month, undertook to “clarify” the “correct standard” for establishing a hostile work environment claim under federal anti-discrimination law (in particular, Title VII). Castleberry v. STI Group, No. 16-3131. To state such a claim, plaintiffs must … Continue Reading
The GT Alert — 2013 California Employment Law Legislative Update: Things You Need to Know for 2014 was prepared by James M. Nelson, Angela Diesch and Jennifer Holly. This Alert discusses how California’s legislative changes will affect management of employment in California for 2014 and beyond. The authors offer insight on the more significant employment-related … Continue Reading
In a unanimous decision due to be published on May 15, the Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled that employers can be held liable for failing to protect employees from harassment based upon sexual orientation. In Patino v. Birken Manufacturing Company, a former employee of the jet engine component maker Birken Manufacturing, Co. accused the company of … Continue Reading
A new decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit provides a stark reminder to employers of the ease with which a former employee can get a lawsuit before a jury. Berry v. Chicago Transit Auth., Case No. 07-2288 (7th Cir. Aug. 23, 2010). Cynthia Berry alleged that a coworker sexually harassed … Continue Reading
New York City employers may not use the Faragher/Ellerth defense to harassment claims lodged under New York City’s Human Rights Law. That’s the verdict of New York’s Court of Appeals. (Zakrzewska v. New School. 2010 NY LEXIS 632 [May 6, 2010]). Instead, New York City employers will be strictly liable for harassment by supervisory or … Continue Reading
