Discrimination Archives - Page 5 of 11

Artificial Intelligence Briefing: Tracking AI Regulation and Legislation

As more organizations use artificial intelligence and algorithms to drive decision-making processes, policymakers are beginning to address concerns about these tools — including their lack of transparency and potential for generating unintended bias and discrimination. In our inaugural artificial intelligence briefing, we provide a rundown of recent AI regulatory and legislative developments from across the U.S. that should be top of mind for any organization using AI or algorithms.

Continue reading “Artificial Intelligence Briefing: Tracking AI Regulation and Legislation”

U.K. Employment Tribunal Decisions: When Employees Refuse to Attend the Workplace for Fear of COVID-19

Recent Employment Tribunal (ET) decisions have shed light on the risks that can arise for employers where employees refuse to attend the workplace because of COVID-19 concerns. We consider below how ETs have dealt with claims of discrimination and automatic unfair dismissal related to COVID-19.

Discrimination

In X v. Y (ET 241947/2020), an employer withheld an employee’s wages after she refused to attend the workplace due to her fear that she would contract COVID-19 and pass it on to her vulnerable husband. The employee brought a claim for unlawful discrimination arguing that her opinion regarding the risk of COVID-19 and the need to protect herself amounted to a philosophical belief that was capable of constituting a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010. The ET disagreed. It found that the employee’s view was not a philosophical belief protected under the Equality Act 2010 but “a widely held opinion based on the present state of information” and a “reaction to a threat of physical harm”. Her claim therefore failed.

Continue reading “U.K. Employment Tribunal Decisions: When Employees Refuse to Attend the Workplace for Fear of COVID-19”

Pay Equity Update: New York City’s New Salary Range Disclosure Law

Several states and localities have passed laws that seek to address pay inequity, based on gender, race and other protected categories. While the intent behind these laws is similar, the laws impose different obligations. New York City is the latest locality to impose a salary range disclosure requirement on employers. On January 15, 2022, the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) was amended to prohibit employers with four or more workers (including independent contractors) from advertising a job, promotion or transfer opportunity without stating the minimum and maximum salary for the position. The range may extend from the lowest to the highest salary the employer in good faith believes at the time of the posting it would pay for the advertised job, promotion or transfer opportunity. New York City’s salary range law is effective May 15, 2022.

Continue reading “Pay Equity Update: New York City’s New Salary Range Disclosure Law”

State & Local Employment Law Developments: Q4 2021

The fourth quarter of 2021 continued the trend of increasing regulation of the workplace by state and local governments. Although it is not possible to discuss all state and local laws, this post provides an overview of recent and upcoming legislative developments to help you and your organization stay in compliance. (Please note that developments related to issues such as minimum wage rates and COVID-19 are not included.)

Continue reading “State & Local Employment Law Developments: Q4 2021”

President Biden Repeals Executive Order 13950 Upon Taking Office

On his first day in office, President Biden issued the “Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government,” overturning President Trump’s “Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping” (EO 13950), which had caused many contractors to postpone or cancel their diversity trainings and initiatives.

For the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.

Federal District Court Issues Nationwide Temporary Ban on Executive Order 13950

Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction banning the enforcement of Sections 4 and 5 of Executive Order 13950, a controversial federal directive purportedly enacted “to combat offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating” by prohibiting federal contractors and grantees from inculcating such views in their diversity and inclusion workplace trainings. While the preliminary injunction represents a significant win for the government contracting community, it is not a permanent injunction. It remains to be seen whether the government will appeal the order, or whether the incoming Biden administration will rescind the Executive Order in its entirety.

For the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.