News

When young managers supervise older subordinates, the age differential can set up generational conflicts that cause legal trouble for employers. Those managers may be impatient for change and hold stereotypical views of what older workers can or cannot do. Prevent potential age bias claims by making sure all supervisors understand their responsibilities under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.

No law specifically prohibits a workplace rule requiring employees to only speak English on the job. However, the EEOC is aggressively challenging English-only rules under Title VII, which bars national-origin discrimination.

Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act, it’s illegal to offer different benefits to workers ages 40 and older than you offer to younger employees. That’s true even if it costs you more to provide the same benefits to older workers.

Despite the carefully planned interview questions and hiring rubrics, hiring decisions often hinge on one factor above all others: whether the interviewer simply likes the candidate. This personality-based assessment not only undermines objective hiring practices but perpetuates workplace inequities that follow employees throughout their careers.

The order, issued April 23 and titled “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy,” contends that the threat of being sued for disparate-impact discrimination prevents employers from hiring the best-qualified candidates, promoting successful employees and generally running their businesses as they see fit.

There’s a simple way to avoid many kinds of reverse-discrimination lawsuits: Treat everyone alike. That means making sure supervisors apply work rules impartially and without exception unless there is an objective reason discipline should differ.

Workplace discrimination laws don’t give a free pass to employees who violate legitimate work rules. Don’t let fear of being sued stop you from disciplining workers who deserve it.

If you pay managers or executives more for achieving diversity, equity and inclusion goals, you might attract the attention of EEOC lawyers intent on curtailing DEI initiatives—and you could find yourself the target of a lawsuit.

The mere existence of a DEI program doesn’t establish a hostile environment if an employee wasn’t singled out or personally affected.

It is legally risky to run an internet search to find out more about job applicants, especially if you are looking for information about a medical condition. It’s too easy to find information that should play no role in the hiring process. The likely result: a disability discrimination lawsuit.