Search for: "EEOC v. United Parcel Service, Inc." Results 21 - 40 of 70
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jul 2014, 9:10 am by Hunton & Williams LLP
United Parcel Service, Inc., the same case the Supreme Court agreed on July 1 to hear during its next term. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 5:36 am by Joy Waltemath
Because the EEOC’s Sec. 12112(b)(6) claim was not premised on attendance but rather on the employer’s alleged 100-percent healed requirement, the 12-month policy could be considered an impermissible qualification standard and not an essential function, a federal district court in Illinois, denying the company’s motion to dismiss (EEOC v United Parcel Service, Inc, February 11, 2014, Ellis, S). 12-month leave policy. [read post]
15 Feb 2016, 6:21 am by Joy Waltemath
United Parcel Service, Inc.] ensures that employers make reasonable accommodations for pregnant women who need them to keep working. [read post]
30 Aug 2022, 9:17 am by Ryan M. Bates and JeeHyun Yoon
United Parcel Service Inc., 575 U.S. 206 (2015), which adapted the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework to pregnancy accommodation claims under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 5:53 pm by Joel O'Malley
United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 12-1226, which involves the extent to which employers must provide pregnant employees work accommodations provided to other non-pregnant workers with work limitations under the PDA. [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
United Parcel Service, federal courts around the country have been grappling with the proper treatment of accommodation claims. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 7:15 am by Maureen Johnston
United Parcel Service 12-1226Issue: Whether, and in what circumstances, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, 42 U.S.C. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 4:33 am by Stuart M. Gerson
On October 2nd, the Supreme Court granted cert. in a Title VII religious accommodation case, EEOC v. [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 7:13 am by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C.
United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 12-1226, which poses whether the Pregnancy Discrimination Act requires an employer to accommodate a pregnant woman with work restrictions related to pregnancy in the same manner as it accommodates a non-pregnant employee with the same restrictions, but not related to pregnancy. [read post]