Compliance Stuff

The 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals is continuing to reshape how judges evaluate evidence in employment discrimination and retaliation cases. Its December 5 decision in  Ismael v. Roundtree  further distances the court from the traditional burden-shifting framework and reinforces its preference for a “convincing mosaic” standard . This development could make it more difficult for employers to obtain early dismissal in discrimination and retaliation lawsuits – and employers in the 11th Circuit (Florida, Georgia, and Alabama) should take note. Here’s a rundown of the ruling, what the “convincing mosaic” standard could mean for your workplace litigation strategy, and five compliance steps to take now. A Quick Refresher:  McDonnell Douglas  vs. Convincing Mosaic For decades, courts relied on the US Supreme Court’s  McDonnell Douglas  framework to analyze circumstantial evidence of discrimination. Under that approach, once an employee establishes a prima facie ...

A new federal appeals court decision just delivered welcome clarity for staffing companies that provide optional benefits and deduct the expense from employees’ wages. The December 5 ruling from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a staffing agency can deduct the cost of optional job-site transportation and does not have to pay workers for travel, waiting time, or tool-pickup tasks, so long as those activities aren’t part of the employee’s core work . It’s a solid win for staffing agencies in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama, but industry leaders across the country can also benefit from the lessons this case teaches. Here are seven key takeaways staffing companies can take from the  Villarino v. Pacesetter Personnel Service  decision, along with a list of specific action items you can put into place. What Happened? The dispute began when a group of day laborers sued Florida-based Pacesetter Personnel Service, arguing that the company’s long-standing transportation system ...

In the never-ending saga of COVID-19 vaccination employment litigation, a newly filed lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia underscores the ongoing legal challenges employers face when enforcing COVID-19 vaccine mandates, particularly in remote work settings. The case,  Thomas-Andre v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Georgia Inc. , centers on an employee’s claim that she was unlawfully terminated after her religious exemption request to Kaiser’s COVID-19 vaccination policy was denied. Background of the Case The plaintiff is a practicing Seventh-day Adventist who worked as a remote care manager for Kaiser. According to the complaint, she performed 100% of her job duties from home and had no direct interaction with patients or coworkers. In August 2021, Kaiser implemented a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy for all employees. The policy allowed for religious exemptions and pledged to engage in an interactive process with employees who submitted ...

KEY TAKEAWAYS: Georgia employers can strengthen their defense of Workers’ Compensation claims by establishing a strategically curated panel of physicians Employers have the authority to select panel physicians whose practices and philosophies align with the company’s objectives Employers must ensure the injured employees clearly understand the panel process and their rights within it In Georgia workers’ compensation claims, the Panel of Physicians is the employer’s first line of defense after an accident . Maintaining control of medical from day one can make all the difference in how a claim unfolds. But if the panel is  invalid , the injured employee can pick any doctor they want as their Authorized Treating Physician (ATP). That shift can significantly increase exposure for both medical and indemnity benefits and prolong the timeline for resolving the claim. Employers have the right to select physicians who are aligned with their goals: providers who understand their business, ro...

  States and cities are as busy as ever passing new workplace regulations throughout the calendar year. Here is our mid-year report summarizing the notable labor and employment laws that take effect from roughly July through October.  Georgia Bill / Ordinance / Regulation Main Topic Summary Effective Date Georgia HB 339 App-Based Workers Exempts rideshare network services from liability for actions of drivers in certain instances. 7/1/2025 This article provides a general snapshot of generally applicable labor and employment laws taking effect soon. Please note that while some of the laws listed below are industry-specific, this article is not meant to be all-inclusive. In addition, many state legislatures are still active, so new laws are taking effect on a near-daily basis. Littler monitors federal, state and local legislation, executive orders, and administrative regulations and other agency activity that impact the labor and employment landscape. Employers that want to keep...

On May 15, 2025, the district court for the Northern District of Texas issued an order vacating the gender-identity portions of the EEOC’s 2024 Enforcement Guidance.  In the order, District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk stated that all language defining “sex” under Title VII to include “sexual orientation” and/or “gender identity” was contrary to law and therefore vacated.  Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia  (2020) So, where does the law stand in regards to how “sex” is defined under Title VII and whether it includes gender-identity or sexual orientation?  The Supreme Court previously addressed the issue, though in a limited capacity.  In  Bostock , Justice Gorsuch (joined by Justices Roberts, Ginsburg, Bryer, Sotomayor, and Kagan) established that an employer who terminates an individual based on that individual being gay or transgender violates the law; and this remains the law of the land.  The Supreme Court’s reasoning in  Bostock  can be ...

Real World Impact:   The United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in a sex discrimination case as it sided with a straight woman on the standard to be used in pleading disparate treatment on the basis of her sexual orientation . The Court granted certiorari from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Background on  Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services This case arises from a claim that Ames was not promoted – and, later, was demoted – as a result of her sexuality . In 2004, Ames was hired as an executive secretary at the Ohio Department of Youth Services. In 2014, she was appointed program administrator. In 2018, Ginine Trim, a gay woman, came into the Department as Ames’s supervisor. Under Trim’s leadership, Ames received positive performance evaluations. However, when she applied for a promotion in 2019, she was denied . Instead, a gay woman with less experience and no college degree was chosen over Ames. Not long after being denied a promotio...

What is E-Verify? E-Verify is a federal employment verification internet-based system that employers may use to electronically confirm the employment eligibility of new hires. The E-Verify system compares an employee’s information on their I-9 form with the records at the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration. All employees must complete a form I-9 by their first day of employment to verify their eligibility to work in the United States. But not all employers are required to use the E-Verify system.   Who Must Use E-Verify? Federal contractors with qualifying contracts must use E-Verify to confirm the employment eligibility status of employees. Nine states currently require private employers to use E-Verify: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Utah. The requirements for private employers vary from state to state. Some states that require the use of E-Verify apply the law to all private empl...