In denying a motion to dismiss, the Eastern District of New York has ruled that, while Title VII does not prohibit harassment or discrimination based upon sexual orientation, it does prohibit retaliation for opposing discrimination based upon sexual orientation. Birkholz v. City of New York, 1:10-cv-04719 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 22, 2012). In Birkholz v. City of New York, a guidance counselor brought, among other claims, allegations of discrimination and retaliation under Title VII on the basis of his sexual orientation. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim for sexual orientation discrimination under Title VII, (which, unlike NY state law, does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation), but did not dismiss his Title VII retaliation claim based upon his complaints of sexual orientation discrimination. According to the court, “the reality that some complaints [like discrimination based on sexual orientation under Title VII] are not legally sustainable does not license employers to retaliate in ways that would undermine the goal of unfettered access.” This ruling is aligned with similar rulings by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and two other district courts in the Second Circuit, but it is contrary to rulings by the Sixth and Seventh Circuit Courts of Appeals.
Citing the lack of paid sick time for private-sector workers and the goals of reducing health care expenditures and promoting a healthier and more productive workforce, the towns of Morristown and Plainfield, New Jersey, recently adopted ordinances that require private employers to provide paid sick time to employees.
In an October 29 report, POLITICO Pro’s Brian Mahoney offered a behind the scenes insight into the thinking of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Richard f. Griffin, Jr. on his initiatives to alter the Board’s “joint employer” standard. Quoting from Griffin’s remarks to a West Virginia University College…..
Any employer that implemented reductions in force or layoffs after 2008 should consider filing refund claims for the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) taxes paid on severance benefits based on a recent Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision. In United States v. Quality Stores, Inc., No. 10-1563 (September 7, 2012),…..