Wessels Sherman Labor and Employment Law Blog

The first thing to check is: Was the Charge of Discrimination filed "timely"? A Charge of Discrimination must be filed within 300 days after the alleged discriminatory actions, or one year for a fair housing case.

On April 11, 2019, the Illinois state Senate passed Senate Bill 1829, also known as the Workplace Transparency Act. If passed by the Illinois House of Representatives and if signed by the Governor, this Act would impose new requirements and limitations with respect to harassment and discrimination claims on Illinois employers. As of May 10, 2019, this bill is pending before the House Rules Committee.

As we approach the summer months with temperatures rising and days getting longer, the issue of summer interns gains more interest for both employers and the interns alike. For the interns, they gain experience, training and exposure to the employment industries and real work life. For employers, they gain new help, new ideas and hopefully development of a pipeline for future employees. But one of the biggest problems with regard to summer interns for employers is whether or not the summer intern is a paid or unpaid position. This year, the United States Department of Labor has rejected its old six (6) factor test and replaced it with a new seven (7) factor test which is known as the "Primary Beneficiary Test".

On May 23, 2019 the Illinois Supreme Court ruled, in Jane Doe v. Chad Coe et al. - a case of first impression for the court - what elements are necessary to pursue a lawsuit for "negligent supervision" of an employee. Most state courts recognize claims against employers for negligence regarding their employees who harm others, and Illinois is no exception. "Negligent hiring" generally involves hiring an employee who foreseeably would harm someone, who in fact does go on to harm someone (e.g. hiring an individual to work at a day-care who is known, or through a reasonable background check should have been known, was a convicted pedophile who poses a risk to children, if the employee later molests a child). Conversely, a claim of "negligent retention" may exist where an employer fails to discharge an employee known (or who reasonably should have been known) to present a foreseeable risk to others, who then goes on to do harm. Yes, that's right - employers sometimes have a legal duty to fire an employee! The recent Coe case involved claims for both negligent hiring and negligent retention, but also a claim for "negligent supervision." As the name suggests, a claim for negligent supervision involves an employer's failure to properly supervise employee(s) to avoid foreseeable risks of harm to others. While the Illinois Supreme Court had previously recognized the existence of a claim for negligent supervision, it had not addressed what elements are required to pursue such a claim. In doing so the court paved a relatively easy path for plaintiffs to sue not only employers for negligent supervision, but also individuals who direct and control workers. Employers, owners, managers and front-line supervisors in Illinois will want to take notice of this important decision and pay particular attention to the kinds of specific responsibilities expected of them (perhaps even doing a "Google search" on some applicants).