CINCINNATI — A former public school administrator may proceed with his claims for age and gender bias under federal law after showing that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to pretext for all of the school district’s reasons a younger female candidate was chosen for a newly created position (Gregory Stokes v. Detroit Public Schools, No. 19-1773, 6th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 10451).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The National Labor Relations Board on April 1 announced that it will not extend its suspension of representation elections, including mail ballot ones, due to the novel coronavirus beyond April 3.
DENVER — A Telluride, Colo., shuttle service company violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) when it told a 79-year-old applicant that he would not be hired because he was too old to be covered as a driver under the company’s commercial auto insurance policy, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleges in a March 31 complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. San Miguel Mountain Ventures, LLC, No. 20-881, D. Colo.).
TRENTON, N.J. — The New Jersey Supreme Court in a March 10 per curiam opinion affirmed an appellate panel’s reinstatement of a funeral director’s lawsuit accusing his former employer of violating the Law Against Discrimination (LAD) by firing him for using medical marijuana, ruling that the employee brought forth sufficient claims to survive a motion to dismiss (Justin Wild v. Carriage Funeral Holdings, et al., No. 082836, N.J. Sup., 2020 N.J. LEXIS 299).
BOSTON — A ride-sharing company filed a notice of appeal on March 27, the same day a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that its arbitration agreement is not subject to the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) as its drivers are exempt and that the agreement’s class action waiver is not enforceable under Massachusetts law (Melody Cunningham, et al. v. Lyft, Inc., et al., No. 19-11974, D. Mass., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53653).
NEW YORK — A federal magistrate judge in New York on March 26 narrowed the class of female employee suing Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (collectively, Goldman) for gender bias, finding that arbitration agreements entered into by some class members leave individual arbitration as their only remedy (H. Cristina Chen-Oster, et al. v. Goldman, Sachs & Co., et al., No. 10-6950, S.D. N.Y., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53302).
WICHITA, Kan. — The failure of the plaintiff in an overtime pay dispute to request the production of electronically stored information (ESI) in a desired format led a Kansas federal magistrate judge on March 30 to deny her request to compel her former employer to re-produce employee pay data in another format, stating that the “dispute could have been avoided altogether had the parties adequately conferred” prior to the discovery process (Peggy Lynn Lundine v. Gates Corp., No. 6:18-cv-01235, D. Kan., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54637).
NEWARK, N.J. — A New Jersey federal magistrate judge on March 25 denied an employee’s motion to add Government Employees Insurance Co. (GEICO) to his discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against a franchised third-party vendor of GEICO because there are no specific allegations that GEICO asserts control over the franchisee (Nasser Saleh v. Egglinger Insurance Agency, LLC, et al., No. 19-13944, D. N.J., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51350).
FRESNO, Calif. — A federal judge on March 26 granted preliminary approval of a $3.2 million settlement that would end wage-and-hour claims by California correctional officers who brought two class complaints seeking pay for missed meal and rest breaks and time spent going through security checks, but directed the parties to further explain incentive payments for the named plaintiffs that “appear . . . to be somewhat disproportionate” at the final approval stage (Jose Gonzalez, et al. v. CoreCivic of Tennessee, LLC, et al., No. 16-1891, E.D. Calif., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52840).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on March 31 announced that it finalized a series of amendments to its rules and regulations governing NLRB-conducted representation elections and proof of majority support in construction-industry collective bargaining relationships.
PHILADELPHIA — A newspaper company’s letter to the union representing its employees stating its intention to disavow the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) when it expired was clear, so the trial court erred when it found that an implied-in-fact contract existed as it expired and granted the union’s request for a preliminary injunction requiring the employer to maintain the status quo under the CBA, a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled March 25 (Newspaper, Newsprint, Magazine and Film Delivery Drivers, Helpers and Handlers, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local Union No. 211 v. PG Publishing Co., Inc., No. 19-3966, 3rd Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 9318).
ALBANY, N.Y. — A former Postmates Inc. courier who was prevented from accepting new jobs after receiving poor reviews from customers is an employee who is eligible for unemployment benefits, a split New York Court of Appeals ruled March 26, finding that there was substantial evidence supporting such a determination by the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (In the Matter of the Claim of Luis A. Vega v. Postmates Inc., No. APL-2018-00143, N.Y. App., 2020 N.Y. LEXIS 655).
HOUSTON — A Texas appeals panel on March 26 affirmed a lower court’s ruling that an insurer owes no coverage for an underlying $87,598 default judgment entered against its hospital insured in an employment discrimination lawsuit because the hospital failed to timely report the claim (Junious R. Valentine v. Federal Insurance Company, No. 14-18-00438, Texas App., 14th Dist., 2020 Tex. App. LEXIS 2537).
OMAHA, Neb. — An Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on March 24 reversed a trial court’s class certification order in a suit by workers alleging that their employer’s use of a fitness-for-duty policy constitutes disability discrimination, finding that the policy involves individual assessments and is not appropriate for class treatment (Quinton Harris, et al. v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, No. 19-1514, 8th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 9118).
BILLINGS, Mont. — A Montana federal magistrate judge on March 23 turned back two requests by the individual operators of a Native American nursing home to dismiss a former employee’s claim that she was fired in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (Tammy Wilhite v. Paul Littlelight, et al., No. 1:19-cv-20, D. Mont., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51127).
PORTLAND, Ore. — An Oregon federal magistrate judge on March 23 granted a motion by a group of former Nike Inc. employees to compel the sporting goods giant to produce employee names and identifying information associated with certain documents that it has already provided in discovery in a sex bias suit against it, with the magistrate finding that a prior ruling and a protective order will guard the employees’ privacy interests (Kelly Cahill, et al. v. Nike, Inc., No. 3:18-cv-01477, D. Ore., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49838).
MIAMI — Without sufficient allegations that Burger King Corp. and its franchisees “are separate economic actors for antitrust purposes,” a federal judge in Florida on March 24 dismissed employees’ antitrust lawsuit against the hamburger fast food chain and its franchisees (Jarvis Arrington, et al. v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc., et al., No. 18-24128, S.D. Fla.).
ATLANTA — A federal judge in Georgia on March 24 signed off on an agreement between a Georgia grocery store and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under which the store will pay $60,000 and provide bias training to end a racial harassment and retaliation lawsuit (Equal Employment Opportunity v. G.N.T., Inc., No. 17-3545, N.D. Ga.).
SEATTLE — A federal judge in Washington on March 24 granted a joint motion filed by the parties in a lawsuit challenging the city of Seattle’s ordinance concerning the unionizing of taxi and ride-share drivers seeking a 14-day extension for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America to produce documents belonging to its members (Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. v. Seattle, et al., No. 17-370, W.D. Wash.).
SEATTLE — The parties in a lawsuit challenging the city of Seattle’s ordinance concerning the unionizing of taxi and ride-share drivers filed a joint motion on March 20 in a Washington federal court seeking a 14-day extension for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America to produce documents belonging to its members (Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. v. Seattle, et al., No. 17-370, W.D. Wash.).