Earlier this week, I gave my two-cents on
Humphires v. CBOCS West, which will answer the question of whether 42 U.S.C. 1981 recognizes a cause of action for retaliation. The
Workplace Prof Blog gives us some comprehensive analysis of this week's oral argument, and predicts a 5-4 victory for the employer. Meanwhile, Dan Schwartz at the
Connecticut Employment Law Blog correctly and astutely points out that most federal retaliation claims are brought under Title VII, that Section 1981 is only used when a plaintiff misses a statute of limitations, and that we should "ignore the hype about these cases [because r]etaliation against employees for filing race ... discrimination claims would still violate state law." This point is especially true in Ohio, where an employee has 6 years to file a retaliation claim under state law, and there is no requirement that the employee first file a charge with the EEOC or OCRC.
The Workplace Prof Blog also has a very insightful post on the rising tide of employment discrimination claims being brought by Muslims.
Michael Moore from the Pennsylvania Employment Law Blog offers a different perspective on whether LaRue will open the floodgates to federal court.
Kris Dunn, The HR Capitalist, points out one of the thorny problems presented by intermittent leave under the FMLA, employees using blanket doctors' notes to work the system and take time off whenever they want even for the most trifling of ailments.
The Electronic Discovery Navigator asks the question, "Do You Know What's In Your Employee's Inbox?"
Finally, the Labor and Employment Law Blog reminds us of some the critical mistakes supervisors can make when dealing with employees.
