Employment Regulation

It is important to note that mixed motive and pretexual motive are interchangeable words.

In a hostile environment claim, the pool of potential harassers is limited to supervisors/managers.

The fourth proof for establishing a prima facie case of sexual harassment determines whether it is a hostile environment or quid pro quo sexual harassment.

The method used to discipline employees can result in a sex discrimination charge.

Statistical employment imbalances on the basis of sex can establish a Title VII complaint through disparate impact.

On an employment application, asking for information about emergency contacts is no longer recommended.

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act is that Title VII views pregnancy as a medical condition.

An employer should avoid imposing employee dress codes and appearance policies because it is impossible to hold male and female employees to the same standards since the clothing worn by each sex is so different.

Federal courts have ruled that only married female employees were entitled to medical benefits for pregnancy.

Hostile environment sexual harassment occurs when an individual's acceptance or rejection of unwanted conduct of a sexual nature affects a tangible job benefit.

The Supreme Court allows the use of sex-based actuarial tables in calculating pension contributions or retirement annuities.

Overt sex discrimination can occur in any employment decision.

Treating an individual differently based on the individual's sexual orientation/preference is an unlawful employment practice under Title VII.

As an actionable Title VII claim, discrimination on the basis of sex can only result from disparate treatment.

The first three legal proofs required to substantiate quid pro quo sexual harassment and hostile environment sexual harassment are the same.

Pregnant female employees must be permitted to work at all times during their pregnancies so long as they are able to perform their jobs.

Titles are never a sufficient indicator of management status; this is determined by duties, responsibilities, and authority.

It is perfectly legal for employers to utilize dress codes, provided the codes are imposed on both male and female employees.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination.

Sex stereotyping results in actionable discrimination because the Supreme Court has ruled that it violates Title VII's basic requirement that gender must be irrelevant to employment decisions.