Understanding Family Responsibilities Discrimination —What Everyone Needs To Know
What You Will Learn
Family Responsibilities Discrimination, "FRD," is the latest addition to the alphabet soup of employment claims faced by employers. So-called FRD cases involve the intersection of work and family demands and various legal claims. Typically, these cases proceed under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Gender Discrimination Provisions of Title VII, and the Pregnancy Protection Act. Among the topics that our faculty will discuss are the following:
An overview of Family Responsibilities Discrimination, including a discussion of the causes of action used in litigation and significant cases
Tips for plaintiffs’ attorneys about how to recognize, investigate, and plead an FRD claim
Practical suggestions for employers’ attorneys about how to prevent FRD, investigate an FRD claim, and value an FRD case
What have the courts considered to be appropriate and admissible evidence of gender stereotyping and family responsibilities?
Will the courts permit so-called experts to testify about what constitutes gender stereotyping?
In training their managers, how should employers approach the issue of gender stereotyping?
Is evidence of disparate treatment always necessary to establish gender discrimination when the claim is predicated on stereotypical assumptions about a female employee?
When, if ever, must employers have maternity leave policies?
Is it discriminatory for an employer to have a maternity leave policy and not have a comparable benefit for males?
If the FMLA does not apply, does any federal law require an employer to accommodate a female employee’s pregnancy-related issues?
What protections and what limits are there under the FMLA for employees who wish to provide care to family members?
Should an employer’s EEO policies address family responsibilities?
The series Planning Chairs/Moderators also provide a summary of recent employment law developments in the final 30 minutes, including any regulatory developments and groundbreaking opinions. As an interactive seminar, the program affords the opportunity to submit questions for faculty discussion.
Planning Chairs
Robert B. Fitzpatrick, Robert B. Fitzpatrick, PLLC, Washington, D.C.
Frank C. Morris Jr., Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., Washington, D.C.
Faculty
Cynthia Thomas Calvert, Deputy Director, The Center for WorkLife Law, University of California Hastings College of the Law, San Francisco
Zachary D. Fasman, Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP, New York
Program Schedule
- 12:00 noon Family Responsibilities Discrimination Issues and Update – Panel discussion
- 1:30 p.m. Recent Developments in Employment Law; Questions and Answers -- Robert B. Fitzpatrick and Frank C. Morris, Jr.
- 2:00 p.m. Adjournment
Total 60-minute hours of instruction: 2. Total 50-minute hours, 2.4
Suggested Prerequisite: Limited experience in legal practice in subject matter
Educational Objective: Provision of information on recent legal developments; maintenance of professional competence as a practitioner
Level of Instruction: Intermediate
