Search : U.S. Supreme Court : Labor & Employment Law : From 10/01/05 To 07/01/06
Number of summaries found: 8
Search For More Summaries
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Civil Rights, Labor & Employment Law, Transportation |
| Title: | Burlington N. & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White |
| Date: | 06/22/06 |
| Case Number: | 05–259 |
| Summary: | The anti-retaliation provision of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not confine the actions and harms it forbids to those that are related to employment or occur at the workplace. The provision covers those, and only those, employer actions that would have been materially adverse to a reasonable employee or job applicant. |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Bankruptcy Law, Debt Collection, ERISA, Injury And Tort Law, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law, Workers' Compensation |
| Title: | Howard Delivery Serv., Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. |
| Date: | 06/15/06 |
| Case Number: | 05–128 |
| Summary: | In the context of bankruptcy law, premiums owed by an employer to a workers' compensation carrier do not fit within 11 U.S.C. section 507(a)(5), which accords priorities, among unsecured creditors' claims, for unpaid contributions to "an employee benefit plan." |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, Aerospace & Defense, Civil Procedure, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law, Per Curiam |
| Title: | Whitman v. Dep't of Transp. |
| Date: | 06/05/06 |
| Case Number: | 04–1131 |
| Summary: | A judgment holding that there was no jurisdiction to consider claims brought by an employee alleging that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) tested him for drug and alcohol in a nonrandom manner in violation of his constitutional rights and the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) is vacated and remanded for further consideration of issues of jurisdiction and preclusion. |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Garcetti v. Ceballos |
| Date: | 05/30/06 |
| Case Number: | 04–473 |
| Summary: | When public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline. |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Dolan v. US Postal Serv. |
| Date: | 02/22/06 |
| Case Number: | 04–848 |
| Summary: | Dismissal of plaintiff's Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) suit against the postal service for personal injuries suffered when she tripped and fell over mail left on her porch by postal employees is reversed where a statutory postal exception to the FTCA's waiver of sovereign immunity does not apply. |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Injury And Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. |
| Date: | 02/22/06 |
| Case Number: | 04–944 |
| Summary: | The threshold number of employees for application of Title VII to an employer is an element of a plaintiff's claim for relief, not a jurisdictional issue. |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Civil Rights, Food & Beverages, Labor & Employment Law, Per Curiam |
| Title: | Ash v. Tyson Foods, Inc. |
| Date: | 02/21/06 |
| Case Number: | 05–379 |
| Summary: | A judgment in an employment racial discrimination suit is vacated where the court of appeals erred in: 1) holding that modifiers or qualifications are necessary in all instances to render a disputed term probative of bias; and 2) in articulating a standard for determining whether the asserted nondiscriminatory reasons for defendant's hiring decisions were pretextual. |
| Court: | U.S. Supreme Court |
| Topic: | Class Actions, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez |
| Date: | 11/08/05 |
| Case Number: | 03–1238, 04-66 |
| Summary: | During a continuous workday, any walking time that occurs after the beginning of the employee’s first principal activity, such as the donning of protective gear, and before the end of the employee’s last principal activity is compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); however, the time employees spend waiting to don the first piece of protective gear that marks the beginning of the continuous workday is excluded from FLSA coverage. |