Some Pennsylvania employees may believe they have been retaliated against at work for taking leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. One factor a court will take into account when determining if FMLA retaliation has taken place is the proximity in terms of time of the employer's action to the FMLA leave. This was the case when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit overturned the dismissal of a lower court in a FMLA retaliation case.
When an employee pursues a race discrimination case, it may be done pursuant to Title VII or Section 1981. The two statutes have many similarities, and facts in a case can be pursued under both laws at the same time. However, Pennsylvania residents should understand that the Supreme Court has ruled that these are distinct and separate causes of action. Depending on the facts of a case, this may help or hurt a worker's claim.
Pennsylvania workers who are unclear of their should note that the federal Department of Labor under the Trump administration has rescinded interpretations published during the Obama years. These statements of guidance were meant to steer legal rulings on whether a person was an independent contractor as opposed to an employee. With the department's withdrawal of these guidelines, courts may continue to apply traditional views to these type of cases.
Pennsylvania employers may want to take heed and follow the outcome of a May ruling on sexual harassment by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. These types of claims generally fall under two categories, quid pro quo and hostile working environment. The ruling makes it clear that allegations do not have to specify the category in order for that category to be investigated by the EEOC. The specifics of the case may shed light on the broader meaning of the ruling.