Title VII should not permit an employer to Plessy v. Ferguson its workforce for any reason.
You know; if it looks like an employee, acts like an employee, and is treated like an employee, then it’s an employee.
I have yet to read an opinion that suggests that legalized marijuana requires accommodation by employers for workplace use, even for medicinal purposes.
Some things are better left unsaid, or, more to the point, un-typed.
This case is a scary reminder of how far the NLRB and its judges will go to fine protected concerted activity.
The distinction between employee and contractor continues to beguile employers and is ripe for problems under wage-and-hour laws.
Employers often treat employees with family medical issues with kid gloves. They not only worry about potential liability under the ADA, but also the FMLA.
While we wait for the law the catch up to society’s opinion on LGBT rights, federal agencies are doing the best they can to modernize these laws.
My biggest critique of the Abercrombie ruling is it forces an employer into the unenviable position of applying stereotypes to make educated guesses.
As a publicly traded company, employees who lodge complaint about financial improprieties or other financial issues require special treatment.