EEOC issues domestic violence guidance
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued a series of questions and answers to employers in an effort to reiterate its commitment to justice for vulnerable individuals.
November 07, 2012 at 05:12 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Last month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a series of questions and answers to employers in an effort to reiterate its commitment to justice for vulnerable individuals.
The Q&As, titled “The Application of Title VII and the ADA to Applicants or Employees Who Experience Domestic or Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, or Stalking,” asks employers to review their anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies, as well as compliance training, in light of the most recent developments in equal employment opportunity law.
In its Q&As, the commission says, “Because these federal EEO laws do not prohibit discrimination against applicants or employees who experience domestic or dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking as such, potential employment discrimination and retaliation against these individuals may be overlooked. The examples provided … illustrate how Title VII and the [Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)] may apply to employment situations involving applicants and employees who experience domestic or dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.”
The Q&As also reminds employers that:
- The ADA prohibits different treatment or harassment at work based on an actual or perceived impairment, which could result from domestic or dating violence, sexual assault or stalking.
- The ADA may require employers to provide reasonable accommodations for a disability or record of disability including, among other things, anxiety or depression stemming from a traumatic incident.
- The ADA prohibits disclosure of confidential medical information.
Read Jackson Lewis' legal update about the Q&As for more insight.
For more InsideCounsel stories about the EEOC, see:
Last month, the
The Q&As, titled “The Application of Title VII and the ADA to Applicants or Employees Who Experience Domestic or Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, or Stalking,” asks employers to review their anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies, as well as compliance training, in light of the most recent developments in equal employment opportunity law.
In its Q&As, the commission says, “Because these federal EEO laws do not prohibit discrimination against applicants or employees who experience domestic or dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking as such, potential employment discrimination and retaliation against these individuals may be overlooked. The examples provided … illustrate how Title VII and the [Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)] may apply to employment situations involving applicants and employees who experience domestic or dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking.”
The Q&As also reminds employers that:
- The ADA prohibits different treatment or harassment at work based on an actual or perceived impairment, which could result from domestic or dating violence, sexual assault or stalking.
- The ADA may require employers to provide reasonable accommodations for a disability or record of disability including, among other things, anxiety or depression stemming from a traumatic incident.
- The ADA prohibits disclosure of confidential medical information.
Read
For more InsideCounsel stories about the EEOC, see:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All2024 in Review: Judges Met Out Punishments for Ex-Apple, FDIC, Moody's Legal Leaders
Financial Watchdog Alleges Walmart Forced Army of Gig-Worker Drivers to Receive Pay Through High-Fee Accounts
GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250