Sentences with phrase «unlawful employment practice»

But alas, some of the most common questions employers ask during interviews cross the boundary into potentially unlawful employment practices.

Today, Lauren represents victims of unlawful employment practices in nine class action lawsuits against Nevada strip clubs.

Limits punitive damages in unlawful employment practices lawsuits to: $ 200,000, when the employer has less than 100 employees in the state; $ 300,000, when the employer has more than 100, but less than 200 employees in the state; $ 400,000, when the employer has more than 200, but less than 500 employees in the state; and $ 500,000, when the employer has more than 500 employees in the state.

(a) An individual wishing to bring a Title VII lawsuit must first filean EEOC charge within, as relevant here, 180 days «after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.?

Our team has decades of combined experience zealously representing employees and job applicants in New Jersey when they've been victims of sexual harassment, discrimination, or other unlawful employment practices.

The expanded lawsuit, incorporating the other employees, seeks unspecified compensatory damages and an elimination of unlawful employment practices at Fox.

It's almost the same lawsuit filed against ABC, Fox, CBS and a some production entities in 2005 alleging unlawful employment practices on shows like «The Bachelor,» «Trading Spouces» and «Are You Hot?»

GINA also protects employees from retaliation for opposing or complaining about unlawful employment practices and it protects it employees from retaliation for filing a GINA claim.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency charged with investigating allegations of discrimination and other unlawful employment practices, issued a revised Enforcement Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination and Related Issues («Enforcement Guidance») on July 14, 2014.

A written charge alleging violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act shall be filed within three hundred days after the occurrence of the alleged unlawful employment practice, and notice of the charge, including a statement of the date, place.

Congress also intended to make clear that with regard to any charges of discrimination under any law that nothing in the Act is intended to preclude or limit an aggrieved person's right to introduce evidence of unlawful employment practices that have occurred outside the time for filing a charge of discrimination.

The Reach Institute for School Leadership will neither retaliate nor discriminate against any employee or applicant because s / he has opposed any unlawful employment practice, filed a charge of employment discrimination, or testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing related to employment practices.

The Act amends the LAD by making it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to pay any employee who is a member of a protected class less than the rate paid to other employees who are not members of that protected class for «substantially similar work when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility.»

Specifically, the Act states: «if a jury determines that an employer is guilty of an unlawful employment practice prohibited by subsection r. or t. of section 11 of P.L. 1945, c. 169 (C. 10:5 - 12), the judge shall award three times any monetary damages to the person or persons aggrieved by the violation.»

Firing or discriminating against a person because the person has opposed an unlawful employment practice or filed a complaint or testified about a discriminatory practice.

In another case of note, an employee filed a case against his employer for unlawful employment practices.

The dissent focused on the anti-retaliation law's prohibition of discrimination against anyone who «has opposed» an unlawful employment practice.

Because Thompson did not allege he himself engaged in any statutorily protected activity (i.e., did not oppose an unlawful employment practice, make a charge, testify, assist, or participate in an investigation), the court found by the plain language of the statute that Thompson was not included in the class of persons for whom Congress created a retaliation cause of action.

(3) With regard to any charge of discrimination under any law, nothing in this Act is intended to preclude or limit an aggrieved person's right to introduce evidence of an unlawful employment practice that has occurred outside the time for filing a charge of discrimination.

Title VII, specifically 42 U.S.C. § 2000e — 3 (a), makes it illegal for «an employer to discriminate against any of his employees... because he has opposed any practice made an unlawful employment practice by this subchapter, or because he has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this subchapter.»

Title VII states that it is «an unlawful employment practice» to discriminate against an employee or job applicant «because of... sex» or other factors.