Now That We Know Who is a “Supervisor” in Discrimination Claims, What Does This Mean for Employers?
Tina Syring-Petrocchi, Partner, Barnes & Thornburg

For years, employers, employees and courts have differed on the definition of a “supervisor” in discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for purposes of holding an employer vicariously liable. In Vance v. Ball State Univ., the U.S. Supreme Court provided clarity on this and narrowed the scope of liability for employers. Learn what the Vance decision means for employers and what, if any, impact it has on discrimination and harassment claims under state laws.

What Does Windsor and the Demise of DOMA Mean for Employers?
Jerry F. Lutkus, Partner, Barnes & Thornburg

When the U.S. Supreme Court declared a significant portion of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be unconstitutional in its groundbreaking United States v. Windsor decision, the impact was not limited to DOMA. The ripple effect will be felt throughout federal benefits and employment law, as same-sex couples who are legally married must now be treated under federal law the same as married opposite-sex couples. We will discuss the Windsor decision and analyze some of its expected outcomes in employment and benefits law.

Did the Court Help Put the Brakes on Retaliation Claims?
William Nolan, Partner, Barnes & Thornburg

The steady increase of retaliation claims over the last two decades is a significant development in the area of labor and employment law. In the Nassar case, a split Supreme Court held for the employer in choosing a more stringent standard of proof that needs to be met by retaliation plaintiffs. This is generally good news for employers. The panel will explore what the standard means for employers on a daily basis and what’s next in the seemingly ever-expanding area of retaliation claims.

Additional Information: Questions? Contact jodie.daugherty@btlaw.com or (317) 261-7922