Labor & Employment Law Update

In the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2024 Muldrow v. City of St. Louis decision, the Court expanded the legal standard for what qualifies as an “adverse employment action” by pivoting from asking whether a change to an employee’s terms or conditions of employment was “material” to whether  the change left the employee worse off in those terms or conditions. Unsurprisingly, employers saw a surge of challenges to everyday management decisions in the immediate aftermath.

The First Circuit’s recent decision in Walsh v. HNTB Corp., however, offers an important clarification that should hopefully serve as a blueprint for other courts dealing with this influx of questionable lawsuits.

As modern workplaces grow increasingly diverse, employers must be prepared to accommodate employees’ religious practices and observations in a respectful, inclusive, and lawful manner. 

It is becoming more common for employees to claim “bullying” or “harassment” when a supervisor enforces rules, sets boundaries, or addresses underperformance. While it is important to take every complaint seriously, company leadership must also recognize the distinction between inappropriate conduct and the normal exercise of managerial responsibilities.