Discrimination & Retaliation

A new employment law is coming into force on August 28, 2019 in the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) in Dubai, UAE.*

Are you ready?

Some significant changes include:

  1. New provisions for secondment to a DIFC-based employer.
  2. Expanded anti-discrimination provisions, including anti-retaliation provisions, new penalties and a defense requiring the employer to take reasonably practicable

[With special thanks to our summer associate Lennox Mark for his contribution to this post.]

From coast to coast, state and local governments are debating and enacting legislation to broaden workplace protections for employee dress and grooming practices. And not surprisingly, employee complaints regarding employer grooming policies — that such policies contribute to discrimination by unduly burdening certain racial characteristics, religious beliefs or health conditions — are on the rise.

In February 2019, the New York City Commission on Human Rights issued a statement of legal enforcement guidance expanding the definition of prohibited race discrimination to include discrimination based on hairstyle. The Commission explained that workplace “grooming or appearance policies that ban, limit, or otherwise restrict natural hairstyles or hairstyles associated with Black people generally violate [local law].” By expressly including hairstyle as a protected characteristic, the Commission effectively created a new legal claim for Black employees who suffer adverse employment actions because their natural hairstyles fail to comport with previously accepted workplace rules.


Continue Reading

On April 10, the EEOC released its charge filing statistics for Fiscal Year 2018, which ran from October 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018. These annually disclosed statistics reveal continued trends in the employment litigation space and provide an opportunity for employers to ensure their policies and practices address issues arising in the ever-changing modern workplace.

Continue Reading

Less than two weeks ago we reported that all employers with 100 or more workers in the US would have until September 30 to provide the EEOC with pay data (read more here).

Then, just days later, on May 3rd, the Justice Department appealed the two rulings resurrecting the Obama-era mandate. Ironically, the appeal

All employers with 100 or more workers in the US have until September 30 to provide the EEOC with pay data as part of the annual workforce data report known as the EEO-1.

On April 25, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan accepted the EEOC’s proposal (more here) to make employers submit their 2018 pay data this fall. She also ordered the EEOC to collect a second year of pay data, giving it a choice between collecting employers’ 2017 data or making it collect 2019 data down the road. Her ruling is expected to impact more than 60,000 employers.


Continue Reading

The legalization of medical marijuana in several jurisdictions throughout the US presents employers with the difficult task of reconciling their anti-drug policies with those state statutes authorizing marijuana use for medical purposes. Adding an additional layer of complexity to this already uncertain landscape, is the growing number of states that have also legalized marijuana for recreational use. As state marijuana laws continue to grow and develop, employers must stay attune to how they approach employees’ off-duty marijuana use for both medical and recreational purposes.

Continue Reading

Although federal and state laws have prohibited employment-related sexual harassment and sex discrimination for decades, the #MeToo movement inspired several states and local jurisdictions to pass laws targeting sexual harassment in the workplace more directly. The new laws address issues such as mandatory anti-harassment training, workplace policies, confidentiality in settlement agreements, and the arbitrability of

Last month, we reported that a federal court in Washington D.C. lifted the government’s stay of the revised EEO-1 form that requires companies to submit summary wage data by race/ethnicity and gender. Following the court’s order, uncertainty loomed concerning whether employers would need to include the additional data by the current EEO-1 Report deadline

Employers may be required to disclose aggregate pay data in their annual EEO-1 filings as early as May 31, 2019.

On March 4, 2019, a federal court in Washington D.C. lifted the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) stay of the revised EEO-1 form that requires companies to submit summary wage data by race/ethnicity and gender. While we expect there may be further challenges and/or delays to the implementation of the revised EEO-1 form, taking a conservative approach means that companies should plan as though they need to report pay data by the current May 31, 2019 deadline.


Continue Reading

Today is International Women’s Day. The day marks a call to action for accelerating gender parity.

In our global gender pay gap thought leadership series, we’ve highlighted the numerous ways governments around the world are taking actions aimed at closing the gap. In the US, the movement to prohibit the practice of inquiring about an applicant’s salary history continues to gain steam. Cities and states across the country have enacted legislation making it unlawful to inquire about prospective employees’ salary history. Proponents of salary history bans argue that using past compensation in future employment decisions perpetuates existing pay disparities among women and minorities.


Continue Reading