California is one step closer to becoming one of the first states to adopt anti-discrimination regulations regarding employer use of automated-decision technology to make employment-related decisions.

Since May 2024 the California Civil Rights Council (CRC), a branch of the Civil Rights Department, has made multiple revisions to California’s employment discrimination regulations to address employers’ use of artificial intelligence (AI) automated-decision systems to make employment-related decisions such as hiring, promotion, pay and benefits. The purpose of the proposed regulations is to affirm that California’s anti-discrimination laws protect employees and candidates from discrimination caused by the use of automated systems, and to define circumstances in which the use of automated systems can result in unlawful discrimination. The proposed regulations also address the use of automated systems for background checks and medical or psychological inquiries, and how that use can violate anti-discrimination laws. Additionally, the proposed regulations impose recordkeeping requirements that obligate employers to retain records that may relate to or disclose the employer’s use of automated systems to make employment decisions, including applications, personnel records, membership records, employment referral records, selection criteria, and automated-decision system data.

Continue Reading California Civil Rights Council makes final revisions to regulations that address use of AI systems in employment-related decision-making

The workplace accommodation process associated with employee health conditions can be one of the trickiest HR issues for U.S. businesses to navigate. For employers in New York, Connecticut, and Vermont, a federal appeals court may have just added a further layer of complexity.

On March 25, 2025, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals joined a split of federal circuit courts in concluding that employees may qualify for a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) despite being able to perform the essential duties of their job without an accommodation. Moving forward, the Second Circuit will now consider the ability to perform essential functions as probative evidence of whether an accommodation should be granted rather than dispositive.

Continue Reading New York Federal Appeals Court shifts standard for assessing workplace accommodations

As the calendar turns to April 1, employers have a firm grasp of their hiring budgets to prepare for what is expected to be a sizzling summer season. Many employers, large and small, will need to ramp up hiring (e.g., hotels and hospitality, restaurants, travel, recreation) to have the extra help in place to support businesses that see a boom during the summer months.

Since spring is typically when everyone “gets the house in order,” below are some reminders and tips for employers to ensure that their work to staff up happens smoothly:

Continue Reading Spring into action: Key hiring and onboarding tips for a successful summer season

On December 11, 2024 (Cass. soc., Dec. 11, 2024, No. 23-20.716), the French Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of an employee who had sent insulting messages about the company and its executives via a company-provided cell phone. This decision appears to contrast with a previous ruling from March 6, 2024 (Cass. soc., Mar. 6, 2024, No. 22-11.016), in which the dismissal of an employee who sent racist messages via the company’s email system was deemed unfair due to the private nature of the exchanges.

In this new case, the employee had used a company-provided cell phone to send text messages to current and former employees who were engaged in litigation with the company. These messages contained homophobic insults directed at company executives. The employee was dismissed for misconduct, a decision that he challenged by arguing that his messages were private and thus could not justify disciplinary action.

Continue Reading Disciplinary dismissal for sending insulting messages via a company-provided cell phone: a shift in case law?

In our prior post, we reported that on February 21, 2025, a Maryland federal judge had issued a nationwide preliminary injunction temporarily blocking the key provisions of President Trump’s DEI-related Executive Orders (EOs). That judge later refused to stay the preliminary injunction, despite the Trump administration’s request, and clarified that the preliminary injunction applied to all federal agencies, not only those named as defendants in the lawsuit.

Continue Reading UPDATE: Fourth Circuit reinstates DEI executive orders pending appeal

In the early days of his second term, President Trump issued a series of executive orders (EO) that were aimed at reshaping the landscape of both federal and private sector policies. Two specifically targeted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives:

  1. EO 14151, “Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing,” directs the termination of all DEI-related mandates, policies, programs, preferences, and activities within federal agencies. It further calls for the termination of “equity-related” grants or contracts and requires agencies to report all employees in DEI positions to the Office of Management and Budget.
  2. EO 14173, “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity,” impacts the private sector, directing the attorney general to develop a strategic enforcement plan, identifying key private entities for civil rights investigations, recommending regulatory actions, and proposing potential litigation to curb DEI practices deemed discriminatory under the Trump administration’s interpretation of federal law. It also requires federal contractors and grant recipients to eliminate DEI programs that involve race- or sex-based preferences and certify that they do not operate any programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable federal anti-discrimination laws as a condition of receiving government funding.
Continue Reading Court clarifies that DEI executive orders are temporarily blocked for all federal agencies

In a recent published decision, the California Court of Appeal delivered a blow to plaintiffs seeking to avoid arbitration of claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) by concluding that all PAGA actions, however framed, necessarily include individual and representative claims. Leeper v. Shipt, Inc., 107 Cal. App. 5th 1001 (2024). Accordingly, a plaintiff cannot evade enforcement of an agreement that requires arbitration of individual PAGA claims by framing his or her claim as exclusively representative.

Continue Reading Court rejects use of the “headless” PAGA action strategy to avoid arbitration

From 6 April 2025, new rules will give eligible employees a statutory right to paid time off if their baby requires neonatal care. This time off is in addition to their other statutory rights, such as maternity, paternity, adoption and shared parental leave, and it will be important for employers and employees to understand how the new right works. This blog explains the upcoming changes, considers issues arising and describes how employers can prepare and manage the impact.

What’s happening?

At the moment, parents whose babies need neonatal care do not have any specific rights over and above the right to maternity, paternity, adoption or shared parental leave (as may be applicable to them). After years of lobbying by charities for premature and sick babies, this is about to change with an additional right to paid neonatal care leave, allowing affected parents to take extra time off to support their family in these difficult circumstances. The government estimates that the new rules will benefit 60,000 new parents.

Continue Reading Neonatal care leave and pay: what UK employers need to know about the new statutory right

As the Trump administration continues to swiftly issue executive orders and take other actions to implement President Trump’s agenda, employers should stay tuned as the administration’s actions may soon implicate the federal Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA).

By way of background, the PWFA requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for employee limitations relating to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical protections. Last year, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its final rule implementing the PWFA, which went into effect on June 18, 2024. The final rule has been the subject of several legal challenges with respect to requiring workplace accommodations for “purely elective abortions.” The cases challenging the final rule currently remain pending.

Continue Reading Anticipating President Trump’s impact on the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

Increases to minimum wage

Effective January 1, 2025, the minimum wage rate in Illinois increased by $1 per hour from $14.00 to $15.00. The minimum wage for tipped workers and youth workers (under 18) working fewer than 650 hours per calendar year was raised to $9.00 per hour and $13.00 per hour, respectively.

Pay transparency posting requirements take effect

An amendment to the Illinois Equal Pay Act (IEPA) requires employers with 15 or more employees to include “pay scale and benefits” information in every job posting for a position that will be “physically performed, at least in part, in Illinois” or for a position that will be physically performed outside of Illinois but that reports to a “supervisor, office, or other work site in Illinois.” Employers must also provide such information to third parties engaged to make job postings and inform all current employees of externally listed opportunities for promotion within 14 days of posting. In addition to posting requirements, employers must maintain records of job postings and pay and benefits information for five years and are prohibited from retaliating against employees or applicants who exercise their rights under the amendments to the IEPA.

Continue Reading Key workplace changes for Illinois employers in 2025