Search for: "EEOC v. May and Co., Inc."
Results 221 - 240
of 395
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Apr 2014, 6:30 am
Allstate Insurance Co., 130 S. [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 7:29 am
The appeals court declined to consider the EEOC’s contention that the laches defense, which had won the day for the employer in the district court, should not be applied in actions brought by federal agencies, and that it would be “unjust” to award attorneys’ fees incurred in pursuit of that defense (EEOC v Propak Logistics, Inc, March 25, 2014, Keenan, B). [read post]
13 Mar 2014, 6:43 pm
., in Esayas Gezahegne v. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 7:27 am
Never in that two hundred years had the Court held that secular, for-profit corporations like Hobby Lobby or its co-litigant Conestoga Wood may assert rights under the Free Exercise Clause. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 4:17 am
Instead they may seek to follow all such beliefs. [read post]
10 Feb 2014, 4:16 pm
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, the In the Matter of: Perez v. [read post]
20 Jan 2014, 2:23 pm
Examples of some recent publications that may be of interest include: IRS Published Covered Compensation Table For 2014 J.P. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 7:11 am
CRST Van Expedited, Inc., EEOC v. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 2:27 pm
Sundowner Offshore Servs., Inc., 523 U.S. 75, 78, 118 S. [read post]
13 Nov 2013, 8:06 am
EEOC v. [read post]
1 Nov 2013, 5:11 am
See EEOC v. [read post]
25 Oct 2013, 3:56 am
Likewise, five African-American employees were allowed to proceed on their retaliation and hostile environment claims based, in part, on an allegation that, after a coworker filed an EEOC charge on behalf of herself and a “class of Black employees,” they were given excessive workloads as compared to non-African-American workers (Rogers v Ford Motor Co). [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 11:48 am
He noted that the Fourth Amendment requires, but the OFCCP has not adopted, the Fourth Amendment procedural protections of: subpoenas for contractor objections to off-site investigations, as required by the High Court’s 1946 decision in Oklahoma Press Pub Co v Walling (10 LC ¶51,222), and warrants for contractor objections to on-site investigations, as required by Supreme Court’s 1978 ruling in Marshall v Barlow’s Inc (436 U.S. 307). [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 10:32 am
Although the OFCCP’s focus on current pay, rather than on pay decisions does not comport with the relevant legal standard following the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Ledbetter v Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co (89 EPD ¶42,827), contractors should still analyze current pay in addition to decisions impacting pay, according to experts speaking at the National Employment Law Institute’s (NELI) Thirty-First Annual Affirmative Action Briefing in Chicago, Illinois.… [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 5:52 am
Quality Stores, Inc. [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 5:52 am
Quality Stores, Inc. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 2:37 pm
Co. v. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 4:28 am
The employer filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, arguing that gender stereotyping is not a basis for a same-sex harassment claim under the Supreme Court’s decision in Oncale v Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc. [read post]
24 Sep 2013, 7:05 pm
Concord EFS, Inc. 13-63Issue: Whether a plaintiff who purchases directly from a member of a price-fixing conspiracy is necessarily a “direct purchaser” under Illinois Brick Co. v. [read post]
14 Sep 2013, 10:47 am
Evans Fruit Co., Inc., Case No. 10-CV-3033, 2011 WL 2471749, at *1 (E.D. [read post]
