|
|
 |
|
Viewing report
|
|
|
|
The Instant Impact of Hatmaker v. Memorial Med. Ctr. on the Level of Protection Applicable to an Employee's "Participation" in a Pre-EEOC Internal Harassment Investigation for Purposes of Title VII's Anti-Retaliation Section
ExecSense, Oct 2010, Minutes: 60
“The Instant Impact of Hatmaker v. Memorial Med. Ctr. (7th Cir. Aug. 30, 2010) on the Level of Protection Applicable to an Employee's ‘Participation’ in a Pre-EEOC Internal Harassment Investigation for Purposes of Title VII's Anti-Retaliation Section” is a time efficient way to be in-the-know on the most up to date facts and ramifications of this case and take proactive steps on behalf of current and prospective clients it could impact the most. Take the 60 minutes to view this webinar (on your computer, mobile phone, iPod, iPad, Kindle or printed out) to make sure you have answers ready to key questions you are sure to be asked on the immediate ramifications of this decision by colleagues, clients and other professionals with whom you discuss the case, as fired employees will not be protected by Title VII's 'participation' clause where they participated in a wholly internal investigation, or where circumstances other than their participation warranted their firing.
Upon ordering, ExecSense will email you a link to download the webinar files for viewing on your computer, mobile phone, iPod, iPad, Kindle or printed out. The downloaded files will include the PowerPoint presentation, audio narration and jpeg images of the slides (for watching on your mobile media device). Take advantage of your next commute, flight, business trip, lunch, or free hour in your schedule to view this webinar.
The webinar is led by an expert on the ramifications of this case and Title VII's 'participation' clause, Christina Hynes Mesco (Bellows Law Group), and focuses on:
- Everything you need to know in 60 minutes about the impact of the Seventh Circuit’s decision on the level of protection applicable to an employee's 'participation' in a pre-EEOC internal harassment investigation for purposes of Title VII's Anti-Retaliation Section
- Perspective on the impact of the Seventh Circuit’s decision on the manner in which future courts interpret Title VII’s “participation” clause and how a fired employee would prove discrimination on the basis of participation in an investigation, how courts will resolve the Seventh Circuit’s split from circuits granting employees nearly absolute protection against retaliation, what facts will support a finding that an employee participated in an official investigation, how courts will characterize participation in an internal investigation begun after a charge was filed with the EEOC, and how the incidence of Title-VII anti-retaliation claims may be affected by this ruling
- The 10 questions being asked the most by employment lawyers and their clients with respect to how this decision will impact them and what proactive steps they should be taking
- Case studies of what other employment lawyers are doing for their clients, now and in the future, based on this ruling
Praise for ExecSense Webinars:
'ExecSense Webinars are an enhanced and effective way to immediately understand new legal trends or decisions that impact your practice.' - Robert Orozco, Partner, Meyers Nave
“Was first on the scene with an in depth overview of this game changing decision.” – Howard Grubbs, Practice Group Leader, Womble Carlyle
“If it's up to the minute information that you need, go with ExecSense.” – Christopher J. Dow, Hunsucker Goodstein & Nelson
Customers who bought this item also bought
The Instant Impact of Smith v. Xerox Corp. (5th Cir. Mar. 24, 2010) on Employment Lawyers and the Application of Mixed-Motive Liability to Title VII Retaliation Claims
What Labor & Employment Lawyers Need to Know About Ames v. Home Depot (7th Cir. Jan. 6, 2011)
Employment Law Basics & Best Practices for Administrative Executives - Everything You Need to Know to Protect Yourself & Your Company from the 5 Most Common Employment Law Pitfalls
The Instant Impact of Chloe v. Queen Bee of Beverly Hills, LLC (2nd Cir. Aug. 5, 2010) on Personal Jurisdiction and Future Trademark Infringement Litigation Against Internet Counterfeiters
Labor & Employment Law 101 for Business Executives: Important Changes and Updates for 2011 Regarding Best Practices for Hiring, Firing, Handling Discrimination, Harassment & More
The Instant Impact of Medmarc Cas. Ins. Co. v. Avent America, Inc. (7th Cir. July 15, 2010) on Insurance Lawyers and Insurers' Duty to Defend No-Injury Product Liability Lawsuits Under Standard CGL Policies
The Instant Impact of TMW Enterprises, Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co. (6th Cir. Aug. 25, 2010) on the Intersection of Exclusions and “Ensuing Loss” Coverage Provisions in All-Risk Policies
The Instant Impact of Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. v. Botticella (3rd Cir. July 27, 2010) on the Standard for Granting Preliminary Injunctions Against Employment by a Competitor Due to Potential Disclosure of Trade Secrets
The Instant Impact of City of Emeryville v. Sherwin Williams Company (9th Cir. Sept. 15, 2010) on Contribution Protection Under CERCLA - What is the Value and is There a Way to Protect Settling Parties Against Future Suits
The Instant Impact of Ansys, Inc. v. Computational Dynamics North America, Ltd. (1st Cir. Feb. 12, 2010) on Employment Lawyers and Drafting & Enforcing Noncompetition Agreements
|
|
|
|
