The first full week of October marked the beginning of what is expected to be an impactful session of the U.S. Supreme Court concerning labor and employment law.
Here is a summary of the significant cases to watch:
- Will the Trump Administration be permitted to end DACA?
- DACA, also known as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, allows some undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children to temporarily work and avoid deportation. It’s a program launched by President Obama in 2012. President Trump is seeking to rescind the program. The federal government has asked the high court to decide if it’s legal for the Department of Homeland Security to end DACA. Several appellate courts have ruled President Trump’s efforts to end DACA are “arbitrary, capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law.”
- Can employees who don’t read benefits disclosures sue their employer?
This case involves an employee from Intel, who is suing the company’s retirement plan committee for making poor investment decisions. In their defense, Intel is citing the Employee Retirement Income Security Act’s three-year limit on filing such claims. Intel contends that the employee is prevented from filing a suit because he received all plan investment information more than three years before he filed his complaint. The employee is arguing that his claim is within the law because he doesn’t recall reading the investment information until just before he filed his lawsuit.
- Are LGBT workers protected by federal law?
There is a trio of cases the Supreme Court will consider to determine if Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination based on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) status. It’s important to note that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has long held that LGBT workers are protected by Title VII. The U.S. Justice Department takes the opposite view and is asking the high court to decide the matter.
- What is the standard of proof for federal workers who bring age discrimination claims?
Here the Justice Department is arguing that a strict “but-for” standard should apply to federal workers’ age discrimination claims (meaning an employee should have to show that an unfavorable employment action by their employer would not have taken place “but for” employer bias concerning age). The employee in the case is arguing for a more lenient standard.
Oral arguments on each of these cases are expected before the end of the year.
If you’re an employer and have questions about labor and employment law, consider calling on the attorneys at Kainen, Escalera & McHale in Connecticut. We do one thing and one thing only – we are an employer defense law firm – in fact, we are one of the largest employer defense law firms in the region. What’s more, each of our attorneys has over 20 years of experience in employment law and labor law matters and can provide your business with comprehensive legal counsel ranging from assistance with necessary preventive measures to trial advocacy. Please contact us if we can help you.
The information provided above is made available by Kainen, Escalera & McHale, P.C. for educational purposes only. It is not intended to provide specific legal advice to your individual circumstances or legal questions. You acknowledge that neither your reading of, nor posting on, this site establishes an attorney-client relationship between you and our law firm or any of the attorneys in our firm. This information should not be used as a substitute for seeking competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state nor is it provided for the specific purpose of soliciting your business on any particular matter. Readers of this information should not act upon anything communicated in it without seeking professional counsel.