The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has held that an employee who refuses to try a reasonable accommodation of a disability cannot maintain a discrimination suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). In Yovtcheva v. City of Philadelphia Water Department, No. 12-3089 (3d Cir. May 7, 2013), the plaintiff, Silvia Yovtcheva, was… Read more »
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) fiduciaries and plan sponsors, as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 1002(21)(A), have numerous investment responsibilities – particularly the responsibility to comply with and adhere to plan documents, perform their duties in the sole interest of a plan’s participants for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to a plan’s participants… Read more »
The Third Circuit recently established the standard for deciding whether a corporate officer can bring a Title VII action. In Mariotti v. Mariotti Building Products, Inc., No. 11-3148 (3d Cir. April 29, 2013), Robert A. Mariotti, Sr., a founder of the company, its Vice-President and Secretary, a member of the Board of Directors and a Manager… Read more »
Summary Of Amendments To Clery Act, As Set Forth In The “Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act Of 2013” Effective Date – All amendments to 20 U.S.C. §1092(f)(1) are effective one year from the enactment date (March 7, 2013). Therefore, amendments are effective for Annual Security Reports distributed on or by October 1, 2014. However, many… Read more »
On April 29, 2013, citing an increase of fatal workplace incidents involving temporary workers, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) of the U.S. Department of Labor announced a new initiative to better protect those workers. Temporary workers are defined as those workers who are paid by temporary agencies and supplied to a host employer. … Read more »
In Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., — F.3d –, 2013 WL 93132 (4th Cir. Jan. 9, 2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that employers do not need to provide preferential treatment to pregnant employees simply because the employee is pregnant. More specifically, the Fourth Circuit held that: (1) the… Read more »
In addition to providing for employer liability for discrimination claims, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”) and similar local laws, including Allegheny County’s Human Relations Ordinance, Philadelphia’s Fair Practices Ordinance and Pittsburgh’s Fair Practices Ordinance, contain provisions giving employees or applicants an additional claim of aiding and abetting liability against individual defendants. Notably, however, if… Read more »
Corporate America has been rocked recently by revelations of hacking into company-wide computer systems from overseas, including concerns that the unlawful conduct is state-sponsored. The more likely and immediate threat to all corporate systems, however, is the damage that can be done by individuals within or recently departed from a company. A prime example of… Read more »
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently held in Blackman v. Lincoln National that the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (“PHRA”) does not cover employees who neither reside nor work in Pennsylvania. While that conclusion may seem obvious and logical, the decision may have a broader impact on employers. Plaintiff, Kathy Blackman, was… Read more »
Articles In This Issue: 1. The Fundamentals of Intellectual Property 2. Circuit Split Narrowed in Favor of Employees With Disabilities Regarding Whether ADA Reassignment Requires Preferential Treatment 3. The Superior Court’s Decision in Patton v. Worthington Sounds Death Knell for Statutory Employer Defense and Elevates Construction Costs Throughout the Commonwealth 4. Pennsylvania Product Liability Law Remains Unsettled… Read more »