Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
When involuntary employment terminations become necessary, employers often seek protection from possible post-employment claims by conditioning severance pay on the signing of a general release and agreement not to sue. As a general rule, such waivers are enforceable if they are 'knowing and voluntary.' Less clear, however, is under what circumstances an employer may condition severance payments on a promise by the departing employee that he/she will not pursue a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in connection with an allegation of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation.
Recently, increased litigation activity by the EEOC signals renewed agency focus on severance arrangements that seek to limit a former employee's ability to participate in any manner in EEOC administrative proceedings. Such agreements, in the EEOC's view, are not just unenforceable, but also constitute per se retaliation. The EEOC's position, and its recent litigation in this area, creates increased risk for employers currently using aggressive severance agreements that purport to limit the right of former employees to pursue a charge with the EEOC.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.