Want this news delivered to your inbox? Click here to subscribe and receive updates.
Looking for Lawrence & Bundy making news?
Click to view our most recent media coverage.
Click to view our most recent media coverage.
On May 13, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) issued updated guidance, greatly expanding mask-free activities and limiting social distancing restrictions for fully vaccinated1 individuals (“Updated Guidance”).2 This guidance is based on the CDC’s findings that (1) studies demonstrate that currently authorized vaccines are highly effective at protecting fully vaccinated people against symptomatic and severe COVID-19, and (2) a growing body of evidence suggests that fully vaccinated people are less likely to have an asymptomatic infection or transmit COVID-19 to others.
As COVID-19 inoculations in the U.S. slowly push back the immediate threat of the coronavirus, experts say employers should be aware that some workers will be dealing with mental health issues brought on or exacerbated by the pandemic.
The pace of employment law change continues to accelerate. We are often told the only constant is change. But can anything top the amount of unanticipated change employers experienced in 2020? We may discover in 2021. To succeed in this chaotic environment, employers need to be prepared to quickly recognize and adapt to new paradigms in the workplace. Click here for the issues and potential changes employers should consider as 2021 kicks off.
In a landmark 6-3 decision, the Court considered whether Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LTBT) status. The Court ruled that an employer that fires an employee simply for being gay or transgender violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination “because of sex.” The ruling was the result of three consolidated cases. Two of the cases ( Bostick v. Clayton County, Georgia, and Altitude Express, Inc. ) involve workplace protections based on sexual orientation. The other case ( R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ) involves employment rights based on gender identity. Courts of Appeals throughout the country previously issued conflicting opinions on this issue.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the Court, stated that the answer to the question of whether an employer can fire someone simply for being homosexual or transgender “is clear,” and that answer is no. The Court held that: “An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.” Justices Alito & Kavanaugh dissented and called the majority opinion “legislation.” If you have questions regarding the Supreme Court decision, please contact the Lawrence & Bundy LLC attorneys with whom you work. On June 17, 2020, the EEOC updated its guidance, What You Should Know About Covid-19, the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws, regarding what testing employers may require for employees re-entering the workplace. (What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws) The update is based on guidelines established by The Centers For Disease Control (“CDC”), which state that antibody test results “should not be used to make decisions about returning persons to the workplace.” The EEOC’s most recent guidance states that under the Americans With Disabilities Act (the “ADA”) an employer may not require antibody testing before permitting employees to return to the workplace. The guidance explains that an antibody test is a “medical examination” under the ADA and, because of the CDC’s guidance set forth above, such a test does not meet the ADA’s requirement of an inquiry that is “job related and consistent with business necessity.” The guidance specifically notes, however, that antibody testing is different from testing to determine whether someone has an active case of COVID-19. Previous guidance from the EEOC allows the latter, as it is permissible under the ADA.
If you have questions about any aspect of the EEOC’s guidance, please contact the Lawrence & Bundy LLC attorneys with whom you work. On March 18, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (the “FFCRA”). The legislation, a response to the pandemic COVID-19, also referred to as the “novel coronavirus,” is an emergency supplemental appropriations act designed to provide relief and health care assistance during and as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Now that some states are preparing to lift shelter-in-place orders that would allow businesses to reopen, employers are trying to determine the best way to have their employees return to work despite the continuing risks presented by the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”) issued guidelines advising employers about practices that they may take to control COVID-19 exposure in the workplace.
Happy New Year as we enter this new decade. 2019 saw a number of changes in the employment law landscape, and this year will undoubtedly see even more. Click here to read this year’s resolutions.
Lawrence & Bundy’s Allegra Lawrence-Hardy and Kathy Glennon explore how the #MeToo movement has impacted the legal landscape and the workplace in the last two years, discuss red flags for employers and offer tips on mitigating risk. Read the article here.
Start your year with Allegra Lawrence Hardy’s and Bonnie Burke’s annual Top 10 Employer Resolutions. Click here to read this year’s resolutions. Don’t miss key 2018 changes and be prepared for important 2019 developments.
|
We contribute to the legal field by sharing our experience and insights in the form of articles and presentations designed to improve your way of doing business. You may search by category below, or contact us if you are interested in a field of study not listed here. Categories
All
|