Seyfarth Synopsis: In the high-profile EEOC race discrimination litigation against Bass Pro, the Court denied the EEOC’s motion for a ruling that would have allowed it to include in its § 706 claims those individuals who had not yet applied to work for Bass Pro when the mandatory Title VII conciliation process took place.
***
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Christopher DeGroff, Matthew Gagnon, and Alex W. Karasik
Seyfarth Synopsis: The EEOC recently released its annual Performance and Accountability Report for the fiscal year 2016, a must-read for employers regarding statistical data on EEOC litigation. Continuing a trend from recent years, the EEOC has reaffirmed its commitment to
Seyfarth Synopsis: A seemingly innocuous case filed by the EEOC on behalf of a single charging party against a casino operator highlights some of the risks of betting at the conciliation table. Employers take note!
As its FY 2016 wound down, the EEOC filed suit against a casino operator – in
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and Alex W. Karasik
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the remand of the high profile Mach Mining litigation that was before the Supreme Court in 2015, a district court denied the EEOC’s motion for reconsideration of a discovery order pertaining to the scope of the EEOC’s investigation, and denied the EEOC’s motion
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Christina M. Janice and Alex W. Karasik
Seyfarth Synopsis: With the publication of a ten-year review of its systemic discrimination program on July 7, 2016, the EEOC seeks to blunt employer and judicial scrutiny of the EEOC’s litigation practices by emphasizing its internal staffing and technological improvements, the gains
By Christina M. Janice, and Alex W. Karasik
Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc.
Involving the largest fee sanction award ever levied against the EEOC – nearly $4.7 million – EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. may be one of the most important
By Christopher DeGroff, Christina M. Janice, and Alex W. Karasik
As we recently blogged here, EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. is an important case on the Supreme Court’s docket that employers absolutely need to monitor. At issue is whether attorneys’ fees are appropriate in instances where the EEOC failed to satisfy
B
y Christina M. Janice, and Alex W. Karasik
EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc. is a key case for all employers.
We have been tracking the developments (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here) in this case since its inception. Now it
By Christina M. Janice, and Alex W. Karasik
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Mach Mining v. EEOC, 135 S.Ct. 1645 (2015), which held that a judge may review whether the EEOC satisfied its statutory obligation to attempt conciliation before filing suit, and that the scope of that review is narrow,
By Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Christopher J. DeGroff, and Matthew J. Gagnon
We are pleased to offer our loyal blog readers our analysis of the five most intriguing decisions in 2015 relative to EEOC lawsuits, along with a pre-publication preview of our annual report on developments and trends in EEOC-initiated litigation. That book, entitled
