Tuesday, March 14, 2023
- US District Court ME: Associational discrimination claims are viable under Title VII provision, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(m), even absent discrimination because of plaintiff’s own protected class; and individuals may be liable for retaliation or interference under the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S. § 4633, despite the Law Court’s holding in Fuhrmann v. Staples Office Superstore East, Inc., that individual supervisors may not be held liable for employment discrimination
- EEOC: What You Should Know About the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act describes the newly enacted federal law, effective June 27, 2023, which requires reasonable accommodations to covered workers’ known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless the accommodation would cause the employer an undue hardship
- US Supreme Court: Certiorari granted in Groff v. DeJoy, to decide 1) whether the Court should disapprove the more-than-de-minimis-cost test for refusing Title VII religious accommodations stated in Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, and 2) whether an employer may demonstrate “undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business” under Title VII merely by showing that the requested accommodation burdens the employee’s co-workers rather than the business itself
- Maine Legislature: Public hearing scheduled before the Judiciary Committee on March 21st on LD 960, which would prevent the caps on compensatory and punitive damages in the Maine Human Rights Act from being combined with the caps in other laws (such as Title VII), and would prevent the caps from being waived if an employer fails to raise them in its answer
- Maine Legislature: Public hearing scheduled before the Judiciary Committee on March 21st on LD 967, which would prohibit the Maine Human Rights Commission from providing any type of assistance to a complainant in a civil action after a no-reasonable-grounds finding
- Maine Legislature: Public hearing scheduled before the Judiciary Committee on March 21st on LD 1001, which would allow the Maine Human Rights Commission to issue a right-to-sue letter to a complainant without a request from the complainant
- Maine Legislature: Public hearing scheduled before the Labor and Housing Committee on March 16th on LD 891, which would require state agencies, including the University of Maine System, to provide written notice prior to suspending an employee without pay or dismissing an employee and give the employee an opportunity to meet with the employer prior to suspension or dismissal
- US DOL WHD: The Wage and Hour Division describes the newly enacted federal Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers Act (PUMP Act), effective April 28, 2023, which extends to more nursing employees the rights to receive break time to pump and a private place to pump at work
- EEOC: Comprehensive technical assistance document, Hearing Disabilities in the Workplace and the Americans with Disabilities Act, which was added to the EEOC’s series of question-and-answer documents addressing particular disabilities in the workplace, includes, in part, a recital of the different types of reasonable accommodations applicants or employees with hearing disabilities may need
- NLRB: Board decision reversed two earlier Board decisions and held that severance agreements with broad nondisparagement and confidentiality provisions violated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act
- US DOJ: The Department’s updated Americans with Disabilities Act website added a featured topic for Opioid Use Disorder
- US DOL WHD: Administrator’s Interpretation of the Family and Medical Leave Act clarifies that the age of a son or daughter at the onset of a disability is not relevant in determining a parent’s entitlement to FMLA leave
- US District Court ME: Motion to dismiss ADA associational discrimination complaint brought by employee with ill parents denied where it was plausibly alleged that the adverse employment actions experienced by plaintiff were motivated by unfounded stereotypes and assumptions that plaintiff would miss work in order to care for her parents, although it was also possible that they were based on the legitimate conclusion that she was actually distracted and/or unable to meet the job requirements
- US District Court ME: Summary judgment denied on ADA and MHRA punitive damages claims where a reasonable jury could find that defendant acted with reckless disregard to plaintiff’s rights because, in part, “there is an extensive body of law on the issue such that employers should know not to terminate employees due to their disability or retaliate against them for complaining of violations of the law”
- US District Court ME: Motion to dismiss complaint by surgeon of Greek Cypriot lineage denied where there was an “air of artificiality” in employer’s argument that § 1981 claim was based on negative attitudes toward her because she was not born in the United States and/or her accent rather than any ancestral or ethnic characteristic per se; allegedly unlawful medical examination could be probative of disability discrimination claim despite argument that it should be dismissed as a freestanding claim; and equal pay claim was based on more than just “information and belief”
- US District Court ME: Magistrate Judge raised issue of whether an ADA plaintiff who is eligible for benefits because he is unable to perform the essential functions of his position may nevertheless be a “qualified individual” entitled to bring an ADA claim; denied summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim that he was denied a reasonable accommodation of being allowed to work remotely where there was no evidence that plaintiff’s performance suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic when he was allowed to do so; but granted summary judgment on unlawful termination claim where the uncontroverted evidence showed that plaintiff’s position was eliminated as a result of a general reduction in force following a merger
- First Circuit: Summary judgment for employer affirmed on former police officer’s Title VII termination claim where plaintiff’s comparators shared one but not both qualities employer gave as reasons for plaintiff’s termination (violent behavior and lying about it)
- MHRC: March 20th Commission Meeting Agenda and Consent Agenda posted
