Search for: "Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Matter of" Results 221 - 240 of 468
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Oct 2013, 3:56 am by Lorene Park
The ADA does not require an employer to place an employee on permanent light duty or give other workers an employee’s assignments to accommodate a physical impairment (Josey v Wal-Mart Stores East, LP). [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 10:32 am by Cynthia L. Hackerott
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]
17 Oct 2013, 7:46 am by Joy Waltemath
In dissent, Judge Wilkinson argued that the majority’s decision had drained Wal-Mart Stores, Inc v Dukes of meaning. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 8:00 am by Greg Mersol
Although the court started its analysis with the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Sep 2013, 8:35 am by Susan Schneider
(working to represent indigent survivors of domestic violence in family law matters);Texas RioGrande Legal Aid Inc., Equal Justice Works Summer Fellow (advocated for agricultural workers in employment, wage theft, and labor trafficking disputes);Legal Aid of Arkansas, AmeriCorps MemberPrior farming experience includes serving as Manager, Geraldson Community Farm (nonprofit organic vegetable farm)Brian MathisonInstructor (Chemistry), Department of Chemistry and Life Sciences, United… [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 6:57 am by Joy Waltemath
Nearly a year ago, the federal district court rejected the defendant’s contention that the employees’ class claims were precluded as a matter of law by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc v Dukes and denied their motion to dismiss and/or strike the plaintiffs’ class claims for failure to exhaust (Calibuso v Bank of America Corp, September 27, 2012, Bianco, J). [read post]
22 Jul 2013, 4:28 pm by rhall@initiativelegal.com
Additionally, the decision, known as “Whirlpool II”, represents some pushback with respect to another relatively recent Supreme Court decision thought to spell trouble for the future of class actions, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]