Mealey's Employment : Mealey's : Legal News & Analysis

Mealey's Employment

February 20, 2026
Judge Approves EEOC, Geisinger Consent Decree In Disability Bias Suit

PHILADELPHIA — Certain Geisinger hospital entities accused of discriminating against employees who took medical leave by requiring them to reapply and compete for employment opportunities when returning from leave agreed to make practice and policy changes and pay $450,000 in back pay and statutory damages to six workers, according to a consent decree between the entities and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that was approved by a federal judge in Pennsylvania.
February 19, 2026
11th Circuit Majority Upholds Dismissal Of Non-FLSA Claims In CBD Franchisee Suit

ATLANTA — An 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals majority held that a federal judge in Florida was correct in dismissing a fired CBD retail franchisee’s non-Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claims of fraudulent transfer following a settlement agreement, finding that the enforceability of the release of the claims “is a matter of state contract law, not federal FLSA law.”
February 18, 2026
Hotel Urges High Court To Affirm Federal Courts Have Post-Arbitration Jurisdiction

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Feb. 17 response brief filed in a U.S. Supreme Court case challenging whether a federal court should retain jurisdiction after ordering a stay pending arbitration when deciding post-arbitration motions, the owners and operators of a West Hollywood luxury hotel argue that there is nothing in the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) or case law that “overrides the ordinary jurisdictional rules” stating that “federal courts with preexisting jurisdiction may resolve related claims in the same pending case.”
February 17, 2026
Arbitration Of NFL Coaches’ Race Bias Claims Denied As High Court Mulls Petition

NEW YORK — A federal judge in New York on Feb. 13 revised a March 2023 arbitration order in a race bias and retaliation putative class case brought by three current and former National Football League (NFL) coaches and denied in full arbitration sought by the NFL and three teams based on “[t]he NFL’s unilateral control over the dispute resolution process”; the trial court ruling was filed as the U.S. Supreme Court considers a petition for a writ of certiorari filed in the same case by the NFL and three teams concerning the enforceability of those same arbitration agreements that require Commissioner Roger Goodell to preside over the proceedings.
February 17, 2026
Split 3rd Circuit Revives Hospital System Workers’ Title VII COVID Shot Claims

PHILADELPHIA — A split Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel vacated a lower court’s dismissal of Title VII claims brought by more than 100 employees of a Pennsylvania hospital network against their employer alleging failure to provide a reasonable accommodation for exemption from a systemwide COVID-19 vaccine policy on religious grounds, finding that the employees “plausibly alleged the circumstantial unreasonableness of” an accommodation that required them to undergo testing using swabs sterilized with a carcinogen.
February 17, 2026
‘Regarded As’ ADA Claim Based On COVID Vaccination Status Stayed Pending Mediation

PITTSBURGH — In a former employee’s lawsuit brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claiming that her employer failed to accommodate what it perceived as the medical disability of being immunocompromised after she refused to become vaccinated for COVID-19, a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge ordered the case stayed pending the completion of mediation.
February 13, 2026
Fired Sales Rep Wants High Court To View ‘Novel’ Circuit Ruling In Title VII Case

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A fired employee who brought federal and state harassment, discrimination and retaliation claims against the cleaning products manufacturer that terminated her is asking the U.S. Supreme Court in a petition for writ of certiorari to determine if the negligence standard that applies to claims of Title VII workplace harassment by a co-worker also applies to harassment by a customer.
February 12, 2026
Wash. High Court To Review $936K Fine Of Restaurant That Operated During Pandemic

OLYMPIA, Wash. — The Washington Supreme Court granted the petition of a restaurant business seeking review of a state appellate court affirmance of a trial court ruling that affirmed the imposition of fines totaling $936,000 by the state Department of Labor and Industries (L&I) for violations of COVID-era emergency proclamations prohibiting restaurants from offering dine-in services, which the business said were unconstitutionally excessive.
February 12, 2026
Attorney Fee Denial In Federal Workers’ Lump-Sum Payment Class Case Vacated

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel vacated a trial court’s denial of attorney fees for former government employees who negotiated a settlement with the United States in a class case over unused leave payments and directed the lower court on remand to address in the first instance whether the United States’ conduct prior to the lawsuit was “substantially justified.”
February 12, 2026
Ohio Federal Judge Won’t OK FLSA Settlement In Pizza Delivery Driver Pay Suit

CINCINNATI — Joining what was described as an emerging trend in the district, a federal judge in Ohio held, in denying as moot an unopposed motion to approve a settlement agreement between a class of pizza delivery drivers and their employer over cost reimbursements, that the court is not required to approve the terms of a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) negotiated settlement and that doing so “would amount to an impermissible advisory opinion.”
February 11, 2026
Connecticut Supreme Court: State Law Requires Pay For Mandatory Security Screening

HARTFORD, Conn. — The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Feb. 10 that state law requires employees to be paid for time spent undergoing mandatory security checks and that no de minimis exception exists, addressing two questions certified by the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a putative class suit against Amazon entities.
February 11, 2026
1st Circuit Revives Religious Bias Claims In COVID Jab Firing, Cites Similar Cases

BOSTON — Following decisions in two similar cases, a First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel vacated and remanded a trial court’s dismissal of state and federal discrimination and retaliation claims brought by two former managers of a large national toy manufacturer against their employer after they said they were forced to resign as a result of refusing to get vaccinated for COVID-19 for religious reasons.
February 10, 2026
2nd Circuit Affirms NLRB Subpoenas, Rejects Fee Review In Fired Tour Guide Case

NEW YORK — A Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a New York federal judge’s order enforcing four administrative subpoenas duces tecum and awarding attorney fees and costs to the National Labor Relations Board stemming from the firing of a New York City tour guide over unionization efforts, but the panel held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the lower court’s order fixing the amount of fees and costs due to the employee not filing a timely appeal.
February 10, 2026
4th Circuit: DEI Executive Orders Preliminary Injunction Is ‘Too Strong’

RICHMOND, Va. — A Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel vacated as “too strong” a preliminary injunction entered by a federal judge in Maryland in a case challenging two January 2025 executive orders (EOs) targeting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility (DEIA) policies. The panel noted that while the ruling was sought by the federal government parties, the groups that challenged the EOs and had been granted the preliminary injunction had asked the district court to vacate the injunction shortly after the appeal in order to amend their complaint.
February 10, 2026
AFGE Opposes Final Rule That Transfers Federal Worker RIF Review To OPM

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) issued a statement on Feb. 9 opposing a final rule published three days earlier that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) states will designate federal agencies’ “policy-influencing positions” as at-will positions that will be “excepted from adverse action procedures or appeals.”
February 09, 2026
Government’s Appeals Of Firms’ 4 Cases Over EOs Consolidated; Briefing To Commence

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a Feb. 6 order consolidated federal government parties’ appeals of rulings for four law firms that separately sued after each was targeted in March and April 2025 executive orders (EOs) in which President Donald J. Trump described the firms’ “risks” to the country. The consolidation order stated that the appellants’ combined opening brief is due March 6 and directed the consolidated cases to go before the same panel considering the government’s appeal in another case in which attorney Mark S. Zaid alleges that his security clearance was revoked in retaliation for representing whistleblowers and others who have complained about the federal government.
February 09, 2026
Appeal Of Removed FLRA Chair’s Reinstatement Dismissed As Moot

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals granted a motion to dismiss as moot the appeal by President Donald J. Trump and the then-Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) chair of the reinstatement of the former FLRA chair who sued after being removed by Trump in February 2025; the motion to dismiss was filed by appellee Susan Tsui Grundmann.
February 09, 2026
High Court Grants Extension To Respond To Union’s Intervention Denial Petition

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court gave the federal government more time to respond to a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by the Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) asking the high court to decide whether it was proper, despite meeting all the necessary criteria for intervention pursuant to federal law, for a Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel majority to deny its motion to intervene in a trio of consolidated cases in which preliminary injunctions were issued that halted unfair labor practice complaints against three employers that challenged the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Board.
February 06, 2026
AI Employment Discrimination Plaintiffs Push Back On Dismissal Attempt

SAN FRANCISCO — The filing of an amended complaint did not revive arguments deemed waived in an artificial intelligence discrimination case, and nothing in any statute or case law precludes a disparate impact action and a punitive damages claim, plaintiffs tell a federal judge in California in opposing dismissal.
February 06, 2026
Citing Recent Ruling, 6th Circuit Remands GM Worker’s Reverse-Discrimination Case

CINCINNATI — A Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel vacated a ruling in favor of the defendant that granted judgment on the pleadings and remanded a fired GM employee’s reverse-discrimination case to a Michigan federal court, finding that the “background circumstances” that were previously necessary to plead reverse discrimination no longer apply following the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs.
February 06, 2026
Extension Granted For Response To Macy’s High Court Union Lockout Case Petition

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The federal government was granted more time to respond to a petition for a writ of certiorari that Macy’s Inc. filed with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to settle a circuit split and asking whether a neutral employee practice with no antiunion intent can be classified as “inherently destructive” under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and whether the National Labor Relations Board can expand its remedial authority to make employers compensate workers for direct or foreseeable financial harms.
February 04, 2026
9th Circuit: Employer’s New Arbitration Terms During Class Suit Are Unenforceable

SAN FRANCISCO — An employer’s attempt to roll out a new, mandatory arbitration agreement in the midst of class litigation that automatically opted employees out of the class unless they quit their jobs or opted out of the arbitration agreement “subvert[s]” Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled, affirming a trial court’s decision to decline enforcement of the agreement.
February 04, 2026
Judge Seeks More Settlement Details In Class Suit Over Tire Company Data Theft

MADISON, Wis. — A federal judge in Wisconsin denied preliminary approval of a tire company’s cyberattack class settlement that would provide the class of customers and employees with credit monitoring, losses of up to $5,000 per person or an alternative cash payment of $45, compensation for lost time and business changes and directed the lead plaintiff, a former employee of the defendant, to provide more information about the amount in controversy, the settlement class, the proposed payments to class members and the proposed attorney fees.
February 04, 2026
D.C. Circuit Denies Rehearing Requests By Ousted NLRB, MSPB Members

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In separate orders issued approximately three weeks apart, the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals denied rehearing requests by a member of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and a member of the National Labor Relations Board after their firings by President Donald J. Trump were upheld by a divided panel; both removed members had, in September 2025, unsuccessfully petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari before judgment.
February 04, 2026
California Top Court Remands Hard To Read Arbitration Terms Ruling In Nissan Case

SAN FRANCISCO — A divided California Supreme Court clarified that while an employment contract’s format is generally irrelevant to the substantive unconscionability analysis that focuses on the fairness of the terms, “courts must closely scrutinize the terms of difficult-to-read contracts for unfairness or one-sidedness,” remanding for further consideration a lower court’s ruling that small, barely readable print supports findings of substantive and procedural unconscionability in the case of a former Nissan employee who sued for wrongful termination after signing such an agreement.