Compliance Stuff

A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit offers a powerful reminder that workplace rumors—especially those rooted in gender stereotypes—can rise to the level of unlawful harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case underscores the potential impact of gossip and innuendo, particularly when such rumors are humiliating, pervasive, and tied to protected characteristics like sex. Quick Hits The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has ruled that workplace rumors rooted in gender stereotypes can constitute unlawful harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In  Cuff v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections , a former correctional officer faced persistent, humiliating rumors about trading sexual favors for preferential treatment, which were perpetuated by both colleagues and supervisors. The Third Circuit emphasized that employers have a duty to address and correct gender-based harassment, as a failure to do s...

he Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) provides important protections for employees with serious health conditions, and notice to the employer is required in order to trigger those protections . But what constitutes adequate notice? A recent case from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit provides guidance on this tricky issue. Quick Hits Notice of the need for FMLA leave does not require specific language or explicit reference to the FMLA. Employers may want to ensure that managers and other administrative personnel who deal with leave and absences are trained to recognize when the FMLA might be in play and to record accurately the stated reasons for the leave. Employers cannot penalize employees for FMLA-protected absences. Background On the Case In  Walker v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority ,a former bus driver for Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority (SEPTA), suffered from sickle cell anemia, which can flare up with severe pain. He had prev...

At a Glance The Third Circuit affirmed the NLRB’s application of a totality of the evidence test and overruling of  Alstate Maintenance LLC  in finding that a single employee’s conduct was protected concerted activity (PCA). While the Third Circuit found the PCA to be a motivating factor in the employee’s dismissal, the court determined that the administrative law judge and Board failed to analyze certain evidence bearing on the employer’s affirmative defense that it would have taken the same action absent the employee’s PCA. On June 23, 2025, in  Miller Plastic Products Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board , the Third Circuit ruled that substantial evidence supported the Board’s determination that a single employee’s conduct was protected concerted activity (PCA) and a motivating factor for his termination . In doing so, the court affirmed the Biden Board’s overruling of  Alstate Maintenance LLC  and expansion of the analysis of whether a single employee’s co...