Noel v. The Boeing Co., 2010 WL 3817090 (3d Cir., October 1, 2010) – In a case of first impression, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a failure to promote does not, in itself, constitute discrimination in compensation, and that the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (FPA) therefore does not apply to toll the statute of limitations with respect to such a claim. The plaintiff alleged failure to promote based upon race, but failed to file a timely EEOC charge before bringing suit under Title VII. He argued that because he was not promoted, he received lower compensation than his coworkers who were promoted, and that under the FPA the statute of limitations began to run anew with each paycheck. The Third Circuit rejected this argument because the plaintiff had not pled a nexus between the failure to promote and the resulting lower salary. A mere failure to promote, the court said, is not covered under the FPA.
Unemployment Benefits Expanded to Include Individuals Who Refuse to Return to COVID-19 Noncompliant Work Environments
Upon taking office, President Joe Biden, through an executive order, instructed the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to review prior guidance on the availability of an individual to receive unemployment benefits if the individual has refused to return to work or take new work due to a fear of contracting COVID-19. On February 25, 2021, the DOL issued new guidance related to a return to work under a scenario in which an individual feels unsafe.
As part of its response to COVID-19, the government of Mexico recently introduced a traffic-light monitoring system that classifies states with the help of four criteria that they must meet before proceeding to the next phase of Mexico’s reopening plan. Below is the map indicating the COVID-19 risk level in Mexico’s 32 states for the week of July 20, 2020.
Earlier this year, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) signaled an intention to take employers to task for maintaining policies that required employees to immediately report workplace injuries and accidents or face discipline. OSHA considers such policies to be retaliatory and a violation of section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act.