What the Protected Class, Gender Identity, Means to Employers

2017-01-13T17:18:55+00:00 July 28th, 2015|Categories: Discrimination & Harassment, Human Resources Compliance, Labor Law & NLRB, Mary E. (Beth) O'Neal, MCAD & EEOC|

Recap of Where Gender Identity is a Protected Class Nineteen states (Massachusetts, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Washington) and the District of Columbia expressly prohibit discrimination based upon gender identity, in both private and public employment. Six states (Indiana,

The Lowdown on the US Supreme Court Abercrombie Decision

2018-02-28T20:58:35+00:00 June 2nd, 2015|Categories: Discrimination & Harassment, MCAD & EEOC, Thomas J. Gallitano|Tags: |

Photo Credit: Mordy Steinfeld CC In a decisive 8-1 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court sided yesterday with the EEOC in the religious discrimination case of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 14-86, Supreme Court of the United States (June 1, 2015). In a Nutshell Justice Antonin Scalia, writing

Medical Marijuana Law and its Impact on Employment

2017-01-13T17:22:43+00:00 May 29th, 2015|Categories: Katherine Kelter, Litigation, Mary E. (Beth) O'Neal, MCAD & EEOC|

On Friday, May 22, 2015, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (“MCAD”) received what is believed to be the first complaint in the Commonwealth addressing the impact of medical marijuana use on a certified user’s employment. The case arises out of a Massachusetts woman’s use of medical marijuana for the treatment of Crohn’s disease and pits

Load More Posts