Discrimination

Expert Analysis

• How AI 'Cultural Fit' Assessments Can Be Analyzed For Bias

  

  Attorneys at Sanford Heisler explore how the use of artificial intelligence to assess workplace cultural fit may provide employees with increased opportunities to challenge biased hiring practices, and employers with more potential to mitigate against bias in algorithmic evaluations.

• High Court's Old, Bad Stats Analysis Can Miss Discrimination

  

  Courts and practitioners should reconsider a common statistical test for evidence of employment discrimination, created by the U.S. Supreme Court for its 1977 Castaneda and Hazelwood cases, because its “two or three standard deviations” criteria stems from a misunderstanding of statistical methods that can dramatically minimize the actual prevalence of discrimination, says Daniel Levy at Advanced Analytical Consulting Group.

• Transparency And Explainability Are Critical To AI Compliance

  

  Although there is not yet a comprehensive law governing artificial intelligence, regulators have tools to hold businesses accountable, and companies need to focus on ensuring that consumers and key stakeholders understand how their AI systems operate and make decisions, say Chanley Howell and Lauren Hudon at Foley & Lardner.

• In Focus At The EEOC: Emerging And Developing Issues

  

  The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's recently finalized strategic enforcement plan highlights how the agency will prioritize its limited resources over the next four years, and the most notable emerging issues include ensuring protections for pregnant workers and those dealing with long-term COVID-19 effects, says Jim Paretti at Littler.

• Employer Takeaways From 2nd Circ. Equal Pay Ruling

  

  The Second Circuit 's recent decision in Eisenhauer v. Culinary Institute of America reversed a long-held understanding of the Equal Pay Act, ultimately making it easier for employers to defend against equal pay claims brought under federal law, but it is not a clear escape hatch for employers, say Thelma Akpan and Katelyn McCombs at Littler.

• AI Isn't The Wild West, So Prepare Now For Bias Risks

  

  In addition to President Joe Biden's recent historic executive order on safe, secure and trustworthy artificial intelligence, there are existing federal and state laws prohibiting fraud, defamation and even discrimination, so companies considering using or developing AI should take steps to minimize legal and business risks, says civil rights attorney Farhana Khera.

• AI's Baked-In Bias: What To Watch Out For

  

  The federal AI executive order is a direct acknowledgment of the perils of inherent bias in artificial intelligence systems, and highlights the need for legal professionals to thoroughly vet AI systems, including data and sources, algorithms and AI training methods, and more, say Jonathan Hummel and Jonathan Talcott at Ballard Spahr.

• 'Miss Manners' Scenarios Holds Job Accommodation Lessons

  

  Robin Shea at Constangy looks at the potentially negative legal consequences for employers who follow some advice recently given in the Washington Post's "Miss Manners" column, and offers solutions of her own.

• How Biden's AI Order Stacks Up Against Calif. And G7 Activity

  

  Evaluating the federal AI executive order alongside the California AI executive order and the G7's Hiroshima AI Code of Conduct can offer a more robust picture of key risks and concerns companies should proactively work to mitigate as they build or integrate artificial intelligence tools into their products and services, say attorneys at Jenner & Block.

• Handling Religious Objections To Abortion-Related Job Duties

  

  While health care and pharmacy employee religious exemption requests concerning abortion-related procedures or drugs are not new, recent cases demonstrate why employer accommodation considerations should factor in the Title VII standard set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 Groff v. DeJoy ruling, as well as applicable federal, state and local laws, say attorneys at Epstein Becker.

• Transgender Worker Rights: A Guide For California Employers

  Excerpt from Practical Guidance

  

  California employers should know their obligations under overlapping state and federal law to protect the rights of their transgender, nonbinary and gender-nonconforming workers, and implement best practices to avoid discriminating in how they hire and promote, offer medical benefits to, and prevent harassment of these employees, says Michael Guasco at Littler.

• The Self-Funded Plan's Guide To Gender-Affirming Coverage

  

  Self-funded group health plans face complicated legal risks when determining whether to cover gender-affirming health benefits for their transgender participants, so plan sponsors should carefully weigh how federal nondiscrimination laws and state penalties for providing care for trans minors could affect their decision to offer coverage, say Tim Kennedy and Anne Tyler Hall at Hall Benefits Law.

• In Focus At The EEOC: Eliminating Recruiting, Hiring Barriers

  

  While the recruiting and hiring segment of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s recently finalized strategic enforcement plan spotlights the potential discriminatory effects of artificial intelligence, employers should note that it also touches on traditional bias issues such as unlawfully targeted job advertisements and application inaccessibility, say Rachel See and Annette Tyman at Seyfarth.