Human Resources

Subscribe to Human Resources via RSS

An Election Primer for Private-Sector Employers

As the 2024 general election draws near, employers can anticipate a rise in political expression from employees both inside and outside of the workplace. Political speech encompasses a broad array of activities, extending far beyond verbal or written communication on political topics. For example, wearing clothing or accessories that endorse or oppose certain issues (N.L.R.B. v. Mead Corp.); wearing wrist bands in support of political causes (Tinker v. Des Moines); displaying bumper stickers, campaign buttons or political posters (Ferguson Police Officers Ass’n v. City of Ferguson); donning insignia such as buttons or decals (Home Depot USA, Inc. and Antonio Morales Jr.); and even “liking” a social media post can be viewed as protected speech (Bland v. Roberts).

Late yesterday, August 20, 2024, a Federal Court in Texas issued a decision which enjoins – on a nationwide basis – the FTC’s final rule which would effectively ban all non-competes with limited exceptions. While we expect the FTC to appeal this decision, the rule will not go into effect on September 4, 2024, or…

From Congress’ recently proposed “Dismantle DEI Act of 2024” to the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit’s decision permitting mandatory diversity training by employers, diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) programs remain a contentious issue in U.S. politics. In June 2024, attorneys general from 40 states joined one of two dueling letters, reflecting the inconsistent sentiments on this topic across state lines.

While properly implemented DEI programs remain permissible under Title VII and other applicable laws, recent legislation proposed by Senate and House Republicans would seek to eliminate any such programs sponsored or supported by the federal government. On June 12, 2024, twenty-two members of Congress, led by Ohio Senator J.D. Vance (Donald Trump’s vice-presidential candidate in the 2024 election) introduced the Dismantle DEI Act of 2024 (the “Act”). With respect to the Act, Senator Vance stated, “The DEI agenda is a destructive ideology that breeds hatred and racial division. It has no place in our federal government or anywhere else in our society.” The proposed legislation seeks to eliminate all federal DEI programs and funding for federal agencies, contractors which receive federal funding, organizations which receive federal grants, and educational accreditation agencies. Although the Act would not apply to the private sector, the federal government remains the nation’s largest employer and the Act would impact a workforce of over four million employees.

On the heels of the United States Supreme Court’s decision limiting affirmative action in college admissions, we have seen an increase in workers who do not belong to historically underrepresented demographic groups filing lawsuits challenging their employers’ diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.[1] As a result, some businesses may wonder: Are our DEI efforts worth the legal risk? For most businesses, the consensus answer appears to be “yes.”

What is caste and caste discrimination?

“Caste” or a “caste system” is a social hierarchy passed down through families and can dictate an individual’s permissible professions as well as aspects of their social life, including whom they can marry.[1] It exists in a variety of ways, but for purposes of defining a legally protected class, it most directly relates to persons of South Asian descent. Importantly, however, an individual’s race or religion is not a caste, and caste and race/religion should not be equated or conflated.[2]

As of September 13th, the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (DOL-WHD) is partnering with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to focus on “enhanced law enforcement” through information sharing, joint investigations, training, and outreach.

The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is considered voluntary and is not legally binding, but may…

When “Gymtimidation” Turns Into Discrimination

The issues of acceptance and comfort in fitness centers can pose serious challenges for owners. A healthy gym environment can empower all individuals, regardless of age, gender, ability, and race. However, if managed by inadequately trained staff or run without oversight, a gym can become a divisive place that breeds anxiety and fear. The phenomenon of “gymtimidation” is a popular topic among fitness center owners and gym enthusiasts alike. A 2022 study of roughly 3,000 individuals revealed that 90% of gym-goers are concerned about others’ opinions and 42% of gym-goers experience appearance-based anxiety while at the gym. Notably, Gen-Z gym-goers are the most affected by “gymtimidation,” with 38% of that demographic identifying “fear of judgment” as a reason for disliking gyms.

Third-party job posting sites such as Indeed, Job Recruiter, etc., can be an easy and efficient way for employers to fill positions with quality candidates; however, Wisconsin employers, including out-of-state employers with job postings in Wisconsin, need to be mindful when submitting a job posting or run the risk of inadvertently violating the state’s non-discrimination law.