Employment Litigation

This Standard Clause can be included in a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) to set out a grievance procedure for unions and employers to use to resolve disputes about application and interpretation of CBAs. It is based on the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), but may be used by private sector employers governed by another federal law or public sector employers. This Standard Clause has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and negotiating tips.

A model letter for an employer to send or provide to a departed or departing employee to remind him of his continuing obligations to the employer. These obligations may include compliance with restrictive covenants, including non-compete, non-solicit and non-disclosure provisions, and the continuing duty of loyalty. This Standard Document includes integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It complies with federal law. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements.

A Checklist outlining considerations for an employer's counsel defending against a disability discrimination claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. For information on disability discrimination claims under state law, see State Q&A under Related Content to the right.

A Checklist discussing considerations for an employer's counsel when defending an age discrimination claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). For information on age discrimination claims under state law, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A standard form for employees to inform an employer about complaints of alleged discrimination or harassment in the workplace. This Standard Document is intended for use only in private workplaces. It is based on federal law. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. For information about state law on discrimination and harassment, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

Model document requests, sometimes referred to as requests for production or RFPs, for an employer's counsel to use when serving document requests on the plaintiff in a single plaintiff employment discrimination case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) or the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). This Standard Document applies to private workplaces. It is based on federal law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

An agreement between an employer and an employee releasing and indemnifying the employer from liability for accidents, injuries or other damages the employee suffers while engaged in an employer-sponsored activity or while using employer-provided equipment or facilities. This Standard Document is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements, but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document includes an integrated drafting note with important explanations and drafting tips.

A Checklist of issues for a defendant employer or employer's counsel to consider at the beginning of a lawsuit or when later reassessing the case to help develop litigation strategy. This Checklist addresses initial considerations, gathering information and common issues to analyze as part of the case assessment. It is based on federal law, but also is useful to assess cases filed in state court.

This Note describes best practices for preparing to depose the plaintiff in an employment case. It discusses noticing and scheduling the deposition, understanding the law and facts at issue in the case, preparing the deposition outline and anticipating issues that may arise during the deposition. This Note specifically addresses cases pending in federal court, but also will be useful for cases pending in state courts.

Template clauses for an employer position statement to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) responding to an employee charge of discrimination, harassment or retaliation. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanatory notes and drafting tips.

This Standard Clause provides model language that can be used to characterize the Faragher-Ellerth affirmative defense in a brief supporting a motion for summary judgment. This affirmative defense can be used to defend against claims of hostile work environment by a supervisor or superior. This Standard Clause contemplates claims under federal law, but its basic framework may be used in response to claims under state or local law if recognized in the particular jurisdiction. Confirm the standards used in your particular jurisdiction before using this clause and cite jurisdiction-specific case law as appropriate. This Standard Clause includes integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

A Checklist outlining the steps in-house lawyers should take when a senior executive becomes the target of a government investigation.

A Checklist explaining how to choose an arbitration panel for industry disputes (particularly employment-related disputes) or customer/ investor cases (on behalf of the respondent firm or broker-dealer) under the FINRA Code of Arbitration Procedure for Industry Disputes and the FINRA Code of Arbitration Procedure for Customer Disputes.

This Note provides an overview of labor arbitration procedings and the law surrounding labor arbitration for employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) as enforced by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Labor law in the private sector is primarily governed by federal law including the NLRA and the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA) and this resource only covers federal law.

This Standard Clause provides model language that can be used to characterize the McDonnell Douglas burden shifting standard in a brief supporting a motion for summary judgment. The standard is the framework against which courts may assess a claim of discriminatory treatment. This Standard Clause contemplates claims under federal law, but its basic framework may be used in response to claims under state or local law if recognized in the particular jurisdiction. Confirm the standards used in your particular jurisdiction before using this clause and cite jurisdiction-specific case law as appropriate. This Standard Clause includes integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

Model objections to document requests, sometimes referred to as requests for production or RFPs, for an employer's counsel to use when responding to document requests in a single plaintiff employment discrimination case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) or the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). This Standard Document is appropriate for use in defense of private employers. It is based on federal law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

Model questions for interviewing the complaining employee, witnesses and the alleged harasser when investigating a sexual harassment complaint. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanatory and drafting tips. This Standard Document is based on federal law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A Chart setting out the limits and discretionary standards of the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) jurisdiction over certain employers, labor disputes and employment practices, and workers. These limits and standards are set by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), federal regulations and federal court and NLRB precedent.

A sample petition to revoke a subpoena duces tecum issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). This Standard Document includes integrated notes and drafting tips. It is drafted in compliance with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the NLRB's Rules and Regulations.

A Note describing the steps an employer can take to prepare to successfully litigate a non-compete action, the primary options for enforcing a non-compete agreement and the strategic decisions involved with each option. This Note discusses gathering evidence, key steps to assess the enforceability of a non-compete, factors to consider before initiating legal action, cease and desist letters, declaratory judgments, seeking damages and requesting injunctive relief. This Note is jurisdiction neutral. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A Checklist of issues for an employer to consider in deterring sexual harassment and responding to internal sexual harassment complaints, including drafting effective anti-harassment policies, training supervisors and staff and conducting internal investigations. This Checklist addresses federal law. For information on state law considerations, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A Chart of remedies available in a dispute between private parties under major federal employment anti-discrimination laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) and Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (Section 1981).

A Note describing best practices for responding effectively to an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge. This Note addresses federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A Chart of statute of limitations under major federal labor and employment laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), the Equal Pay Act of 1963, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA), the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) and Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (Section 1981).

A Note discussing trade secrets litigation for employers whose employees have misappropriated trade secrets. It describes pre-litigation investigation, sending cease and desist letters and contacting law enforcement. It also addresses filing a legal action, including choice of forum and choice of law, deciding whether to include the employee's new employer and third parties, common causes of action, discovery, injunctive relief, damages and attorneys' fees. It includes best practices for preparing to counter potential defenses and counterclaims and maintaining confidentiality during litigation.

A sample statement that employers should provide to unionized employees before conducting interviews about facts relevant to a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) unfair labor practice case. This Standard Document includes integrated notes explaining the information that must be included in the statement and other important points and drafting tips. It is drafted in compliance with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the NLRB's decision in Johnnie's Poultry Co.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Delaware. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Rhode Island. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

This Law Firm Publication by Holland & Hart LLP discusses Colorado's Job Protection and Civil Rights Enforcement Act of 2013, signed into law by Governor John Hickenlooper on May 6, 2013. The new law, effective January 1, 2015, allows employees to recover compensatory and punitive damages against Colorado's small employers (with 1-14 employees), along with attorneys' fees and costs, back pay, front pay, interest and other potential relief. The law caps damages awards based on the size of the employer (1-4 employees, 5-15 employees and more than 15 employees). The new law also eliminates the age 70 cutoff for age discrimination claims brought under Colorado law.

An expert Q&A with Timothy P. Harkness and Dana L. Post of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US LLP on the ethical considerations involved in using social media to communicate with or gather information about a plaintiff employee, former employee or applicant in employment litigation. 

In Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., the US Supreme Court held that the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) does not give district courts the authority to recognize a cause of action for violations of the law of nations occurring in a foreign country.

In Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, the US Supreme Court held in a 5 to 4 decision that a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action was properly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when the plaintiff's individual claims became moot, leaving her with no personal interest in representing other unnamed, putative claimants in the action. The decision highlights, but does not resolve, a circuit court split on the question of whether a plaintiff's rejection of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 68 offer of judgment that fully satisfies her claims renders the claims moot.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Oklahoma.  This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded.  Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements.  Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool). 

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

Resources to help employers minimize liabilities that may arise from workplace romances between employees. 

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement, as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded.  Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

In Supply Technologies, LLC, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) held that an employer's mandatory arbitration policy governing employment disputes for nonunion workers would be reasonably construed to interfere with employees' Section 7 rights in spite of a disclaimer allowing employees to bring and participate in government actions.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled in Communication Workers of America v. Avaya, Inc. that a district court improperly presumed that a union, which had a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) and a neutrality agreement with the employer, was entitled to arbitrate a dispute about the managerial status of employees it intented to organize. The Tenth Circuit held that the court should have applied a more searching judicial review to determine the dispute was not arbitrable.

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses Truly Nolen of Am. v. Superior Court, in which a California Court of Appeal vacated a trial court's order directing an employer and employee to resolve wage and hour claims by class arbitration. In doing so, the court found that the California Supreme Court's decision in Gentry v. Superior Court, which held that class action waivers are void in certain circumstances, remains valid in spite of language in recent US Supreme Court opinions that appeared to call Gentry's reasoning into question.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded.  Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses Williams v. Smith, in which the Minnesota Supreme Court held that a prospective employee, an assistant coach of a college basketball team, could not assert a claim for negligent misrepresentation against the team's head coach, who offered and later rescinded a job opportunity. A negligent representation claim is unavailable where a prospective employment relationship is negotiated at arm's length between sophisticated business persons and does not involve a professional, fiduciary or other special legal relationship. In Williams, the coaches engaged in an arm's length negotiation, and therefore the head coach did not owe a duty of care to the assistant.

In Martin v. Spring Break '83 Productions, L.L.C., the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that an employer and a labor union could enter a private unsupervised settlement agreement releasing union-represented employees' substantive claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The settlement was permissible because there was a bona fide dispute over hours worked, and the union addressed, rather than waived, the employees' substantive FLSA claims in the settlement. 

An expert Q&A with Stephen C. Mitchell of Fisher & Phillips LLP regarding guidance from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on employers' use of criminal history information in decisions about employment.

This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses the Arizona Supreme Court's recent decision in Engler v. Gulf Interstate Engineering, Inc., which held that an employer was not vicariously liable for its employee's off-duty negligent conduct, a car accident during an out-of-town assignment. The accident occurred while the employee was driving back to his hotel after dinner. The employee was not subject to the employer's control at the time of the accident because the employee was not serving the employer's economic interests. Therefore, the employer was not vicariously liable to the victim of the accident. This case is significant for employers because the Arizona Supreme Court declined to extend a recent Arizona Court of Appeals decision, where the court found that an Arizona police officer was acting in the course and scope of his employment when he crashed his state-owned vehicle into the plaintiff's car while going to lunch during an out-of-town business trip.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the California Supreme Court's decision in Coito v. Superior Court, ruling that at least a qualified work product protection applies to: Recordings of witness interviews conducted by investigators employed by counsel. The identity of witnesses from whom counsel obtained statements. The Court also held that an absolute privilege may apply in certain circumstances. Based on this case, witness statements in employment cases may be entitled to qualified or absolute work product protection.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

In Okwu v. McKim, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that public employees cannot use Section 1983 of Title 42 of the US Code to vindicate rights under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Title I) that were allegedly violated by a public employer. The comprehensive remedial scheme provided by Title I manifests Congress's intent to preclude remedies under Section 1983 for alleged violations of Title I substantive rights.

An expert Q&A with Donald Livingston of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) systemic discrimination investigations and litigation.

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held in Reed v. Florida Metropolitan University, Inc. that an arbitrator who found that the parties' arbitration agreement permitted class arbitration, where there was no contractual or legal basis for doing so, exceeded his powers. The Fifth Circuit held that the arbitration award must be vacated.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

This Law Firm Publication by Constangy Brooks & Smith, LLP, discusses Melia v. Zenhire, Inc., in which the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court identified the circumstances when an out-of-state forum selection clause in an employment contract violates the Massachusetts Wage Act. In Melia, the court held that a forum selection clause is a special contract disallowed by the Wage Act when the employee's claim is covered by the Wage Act, the court of the forum state would not apply Massachusetts law, and the employee would be deprived of a substantive right under the Wage Act. 

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

This Law Firm Publication by Ford & Harrison LLP discusses the Texas Supreme Court's decision in In re Frank Kent Motor Company d/b/a Frank Kent Cadillac. In that case, an at-will employee argued that his waiver of a jury trial was invalid because he was coerced into signing it when his employer threatened to terminate his employment if he did not sign it. The Texas Supreme Court upheld the jury trial waiver, holding that the employer's threat was not coercion that would invalidate the jury trial waiver because the employer had a legal right to fire the at-will employee for almost any reason, including the employee's refusal to accept new employment terms.

In Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, a disability discrimination case involving two individual claims, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's refusal to enforce the Equal Employment Opportunity Commision's (EEOC) administrative subpoena seeking the employer's nationwide hiring records, reasoning that the requested information was not relevant and overbroad.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

In Donald v. Sybra, Inc., the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) interference claims should be analyzed under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting standard typically applied to discrimination claims. This case is particularly noteworthy because at least two circuit courts (First and Seventh) have expressly rejected application of the burden-shifting analysis to these claims in favor of a more employee-friendly standard.

This Jackson Lewis LLP memorandum discusses the Washington Supreme Court's September 1, 2011 decision in Cudney v. ALSCO holding that employee tort claims alleging wrongful discharge in violation of public policy may be brought only in limited circumstances, where the public policy at issue is not adequately promoted through alternative mechanisms, such as statutory remedies or criminal sanctions.