Practical Guidance is committed to amplifying diverse voices of attorneys across all differences, including gender and race. If you are interested in writing for Practical Guidance, please let us know...
Earlier this year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers published a final rule 1 to revise the definition of waters of the United States.
THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES...
By: Cameron Kinvig , PRACTICAL GUIDANCE ENERGY & UTILITIES ATTORNEY EDITOR
This article provides you and your clients with an overview of the federal environmental regulation affecting the oil and...
Sustainability-Linked Loans Overview
Sustainability-linked loans are loans where the economic characteristics can vary depending on whether the borrower achieves ambitious, material, and quantifiable...
By: M. Shams Billah , BARNES & THORNBURG LLP, NEW YORK
This article discusses guidance for borrowers and private equity sponsors entering into private credit loans with nonbank lenders in the middle...
Copyright © 2023 LexisNexis and/or its Licensors.
By: Evandro C. Gigante, PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
This podcast episode discusses the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, as decided by the Court on June 24, 2022.1
IN TEXAS AND OKLAHOMA, ABORTION IS NOW A CRIME. In other states, it remains legal. For companies working across state lines, the variances from state to state have created many employment issues that immediately require counsel from Labor & Employment (L&E) attorneys. In this episode, Proskauer Labor & Employment partner Evandro C. Gigante discusses sensitive employment issues following the decision in Dobbs.
Dobbs L&E Impacts: Employers React to the Dobbs OpinionPractical Guidance Podcast
Listen Now >
Here is an excerpt from the podcast:
From an employment perspective, I’ve been looking at it mainly through the lens of employers looking to navigate the Dobbs decision, and again, avoid the risk of claims of discrimination or other mistreatment by employees based on whatever policies or procedures the company is planning to put into place. So part of that of course entails whether and how an employer can put into place policies that provide certain benefits for employees looking to have an abortion, but are unable to do so in the state in which they live and work. And likewise, whether providing those benefits, either one, could create some risk of a potential discrimination claim. Or two, just in terms of the employer’s communication of its position and stance on abortion or employees doing the same, could create risk within the workplace involving claims of discrimination or harassment arising out of things such as pregnancy, religion, or all the other protected categories that touch upon this particular topic.
For additional guidance on issues related to social media concerns, employers operating across many states, and other Dobbs decision issues, follow the link below to listen to the complete podcast.
Evandro C. Gigante is a partner in the Labor & Employment Law Department at Proskauer Rose LLP, and co-head of the Employment Litigation & Arbitration group and the Hiring & Terminations group. He represents clients on a variety of labor and employment matters, including allegations of sexual harassment, race, gender, national origin, disability, and religious discrimination. Evandro also counsels employers through reductions-in-force and other sensitive employment issues. Most recently, Evandro has developed expertise on, and represented clients in, various COVID-19 related matters, including those involving compliance with health and safety standards, the need to provide workplace accommodations and the ability to test and/or vaccinate the workforce.
To find this article in Practical Guidance, follow this research path:
RESEARCH PATH: Labor & Employment > Trends & Insights > Practice Notes
For guidance on meeting medical recordkeeping and confidentiality requirements under several federal employment-related statutes, see
> CONFIDENTIAL MEDICAL INFORMATION IN THE EMPLOYEE LEAVES AND DISABILITY CONTEXT
For an overview of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, see
> PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION ACT: COMPLIANCE TIPS
> RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATION REQUIREMENTS
> SOCIAL MEDIA ISSUES IN EMPLOYMENT: COUNSELING EMPLOYERS ON KEY SOCIAL MEDIA ISSUES
> POST-DOBBS, MAY ABORTIONS BE REIMBURSED ON A TAX-FREE BASIS FROM A HEALTH FSA, AN HRA, OR AN HSA?
> ABORTION ACCESS EMERGING AS UNION ISSUE POST-ROE
1. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., 142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022).