For years, employers have relied on arbitration agreements to keep employment disputes out of court. In 2022, Congress carved out an exception for sexual harassment and sexual assault claims, but the law didn’t clearly say what happens to the other claims in the same lawsuit.
The Second Circuit has now sided with employees on that
On May 19, 2026, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court unanimously held in Sabatini v. Knouse, SJC-13781, that individuals in academic settings can be held personally liable for sexual harassment under M.G. L. c. 214, § 1C. Until this decision, professors and advisors accused of sexual harassment could argue that the statute permitted suits only
A recent decision from the Connecticut Appellate Court provides employers with important guidance on disability discrimination claims under the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (CFEPA). In Stuart Hanke v. Electric Boat Corporation, the court affirmed summary judgment for the employer, holding that an employee who applies for short-term and/or long-term disability benefits has not
On January 22, 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission voted 2-1 to rescind its 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace effective immediately. The recission comes as no surprise, as Chair Andrea Lucas of the EEOC signaled her opposition to portions of the guidance almost a year ago. Although the development is technically
Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released updated educational materials addressing national origin discrimination, alongside new technical guidance that “clarifies” the prohibition of discrimination against American workers.
Providing no statistics or recent examples, the EEOC suggests that such discrimination is a “large-scale problem in multiple industries nationwide” and that “[m]any employers have policies
In April of last year, the Supreme Court held that employees alleging discrimination under Title VII only need to show “some harm” to the terms and conditions of their employment in order to prove that they suffered an adverse employment action, unanimously rejecting the heightened “significant harm” standard followed previously by many lower courts. The
On Friday, the Fourth Circuit granted the federal government’s motion to stay (temporarily suspend) a lower court’s preliminary injunction that had blocked the enforcement of two Executive Orders issued by President Trump in January 2025. These Executive Orders direct federal agencies to end Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs within federal grant and contract processes.
The Supreme Court of the United States (“Supreme Court’) recently clarified the standard for claims brought under Title VII involving allegations of discrimination related to job transfers. Specifically, the Supreme Court held that employees only need to show “some harm” to the terms and conditions of their employment resulting from the transfer and unanimously rejected
In Hartford Police Department v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities (HPD v. CHRO), the Connecticut Supreme Court upheld the agency’s post‑hearing finding that a police department had unlawfully terminated a probationary officer due to discriminatory animus displayed by, and imputed from, a supervisor other than the final decisionmaker.
In doing so, the
Last week, amid much anticipation, the EEOC released a new technical assistance document for employers, providing guidance on the use of artificial intelligence (AI), while ensuring compliance with Title VII. Entitled “Assessing Adverse Impact in Software, Algorithms, and Artificial Intelligence Used in Employment Selection Procedures Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of