By Christopher DeGroff, and Matthew Gagnon
Judge John Darrah of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued a decision this week in the EEOC’s landmark case against CVS Pharmacy. As we have previously blogged about here, in EEOC v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Case No. 14-CV-863 (N.D. Ill.), the
By Courtney K. Bohl and Laura J. Maechtlen
On August 21, 2014, in the case EEOC v. Swissport Fueling, Inc., Case No. CV-10-02101-PHX-GMS (D. Ariz. Aug. 21, 2014) (a case we previously blogged about here), Judge G. Murray Snow of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona denied the EEOC’s motion
By Rebecca Bjork and Gerald L. Maatman, Jr.
Our loyal readers know that we have been monitoring closely the proceedings in the EEOC’s appeal of the largest fee sanction award against the agency in its history — the $4.7 million awarded by the district court in the sexual harassment case entitled EEOC v. CRST Van
While the ADA does not explicitly list telecommuting as a reasonable accommodation, the EEOC guidelines for disability accommodations under the ADA indicate that allowing employees to work from home is required: “An employer must modify its policy concerning where work is performed if such a change is needed as a reasonable
By Kathryn “Chris” Palamountain
Employing reasoning adopted by a number of other courts, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama recently dismissed the EEOC’s claim that an employer’s policy prohibiting employees from wearing dreadlocks violated Title VII – the case of EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions, No. 13-00476-CB-M, 2014 WL 47758
By Gerald L. Maatman Jr. and Howard M. Wexler
On February 11, 2014, Judge Sara Ellis of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied United Parcel Services, Inc.’s (“UPS”) motion to dismiss in EEOC v. UPS, Inc., No. 1:09-CV-05291 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 12, 2014) – a lawsuit alleging that UPS
