All posts by Drew M. Capuder

Publisher of Drew Capuder's Employment Law Blog. Lawyer with more than 30 years of experience, focusing on employment law, commercial litigation, and mediation. Extensive trial and appellate experience in state and federal courts. Call Drew at 304-333-5261.
Sex Discrimination, Sexual harassment, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, WV Human Rights Act

Workplace Harassment: What Employers and Employees Need to Know

Leave a comment

Work­place harass­ment is a seri­ous issue that can lead to legal trou­ble for employ­ers and cre­ate a tox­ic work envi­ron­ment for employ­ees. While most peo­ple think of harass­ment in terms of sex­u­al mis­con­duct, the law cov­ers a much broad­er range of behav­iors. Under­stand­ing what con­sti­tutes work­place harass­ment and how to han­dle it is cru­cial for both employ­ers and employees.

What Is Workplace Harassment?

Harass­ment is defined as unwel­come con­duct based on race, col­or, reli­gion, sex (includ­ing preg­nan­cy, gen­der iden­ti­ty, and sex­u­al ori­en­ta­tion), nation­al ori­gin, age (40 or old­er), dis­abil­i­ty, or genet­ic infor­ma­tion (42 U.S.C. §2000e‑2(a)). It becomes ille­gal when:

  • Endur­ing the offen­sive con­duct becomes a con­di­tion of con­tin­ued employ­ment, or
  • The con­duct is severe or per­va­sive enough to cre­ate a hos­tile work envi­ron­ment (Mer­i­tor Sav. Bank v. Vin­son, 477 U.S. 57 (1986)).

Harass­ment isn’t just about inap­pro­pri­ate jokes or unwant­ed advances—it can include threats, intim­i­da­tion, offen­sive images, or even work­place poli­cies that dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly affect cer­tain groups.

Con­tin­ue read­ing Work­place Harass­ment: What Employ­ers and Employ­ees Need to Know →
Harless wrongful discharge, Retaliation claims, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Whitle blower claims (including Harless), WV Human Rights Act

Wrongful Termination: What It Is and What It Isn’t

Leave a comment

Los­ing a job is tough, but not every ter­mi­na­tion is ille­gal. The term “wrong­ful ter­mi­na­tion” gets thrown around a lot, but in legal terms, it has a spe­cif­ic mean­ing. Both employ­ers and employ­ees need to under­stand what actu­al­ly qual­i­fies as wrong­ful ter­mi­na­tion under fed­er­al and West Vir­ginia law.

What Is Wrongful Termination?

Wrong­ful ter­mi­na­tion hap­pens when an employ­er fires an employ­ee in vio­la­tion of a law, con­tract, or pub­lic pol­i­cy. This can include:

  • Dis­crim­i­na­tion: Fir­ing some­one based on race, gen­der, age, dis­abil­i­ty, or oth­er pro­tect­ed char­ac­ter­is­tics vio­lates fed­er­al and state anti-dis­crim­i­na­tion laws (42 U.S.C. §2000e‑2; W. Va. Code §16B-17–9).
  • Retal­i­a­tion: Employ­ers can’t fire an employ­ee for report­ing dis­crim­i­na­tion, work­place safe­ty vio­la­tions, or engag­ing in oth­er pro­tect­ed activ­i­ties (42 U.S.C. 2000e‑3(a); W. Va. Code §16B-17–9(7)).
  • Breach of con­tract: If an employ­ee has a writ­ten con­tract or even an implied con­tract promis­ing job secu­ri­ty, a ter­mi­na­tion out­side the agreed terms may be wrong­ful (Cook v. Heck’s Inc., 342 S.E.2d 453 (W. Va. 1986)).
  • Pub­lic pol­i­cy vio­la­tions: Employ­ers can’t fire employ­ees for rea­sons that vio­late pub­lic pol­i­cy, such as refus­ing to engage in ille­gal activ­i­ties (Har­less v. First Nat’l Bank, 246 S.E.2d 270 (W. Va. 1978)).
Con­tin­ue read­ing Wrong­ful Ter­mi­na­tion: What It Is and What It Isn’t →
Affirmative action, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs

What are Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) programs?

Leave a comment

The Trump admin­is­tra­tion has been aggres­sive­ly attack­ing Diver­si­ty, Equi­ty, and Inclu­sion (“DEI”) pro­grams, and is intend­ing to elim­i­nate them from the fed­er­al sys­tem. The Trump admin­is­tra­tion is also aim­ing to elim­i­nate them in pri­vate employment.

The attacks on DEI pro­grams treat them as racial­ly dis­crim­i­na­to­ry, and assume they con­sti­tute overt or thin­ly dis­guised affir­ma­tive action programs.

Advo­cates of DEI say the pro­grams don’t con­sti­tute favoritism but instead “cast a wider net” to bring his­tor­i­cal­ly dis­fa­vored or dis­ad­van­taged groups into con­sid­er­a­tion for employ­ment posi­tions his­tor­i­cal­ly unavail­able to them.

So what are DEI pro­grams? Do they con­sti­tute favoritism, affir­ma­tive action, or discrimination?

DEI pro­grams are orga­ni­za­tion­al ini­tia­tives aimed at cre­at­ing a work­place or insti­tu­tion­al cul­ture that val­ues diverse per­spec­tives, ensures fair treat­ment and oppor­tu­ni­ties, and fos­ters an inclu­sive envi­ron­ment where all indi­vid­u­als feel respect­ed, sup­port­ed, and able to thrive. While these pro­grams are most com­mon­ly asso­ci­at­ed with work­places, they also exist in edu­ca­tion­al insti­tu­tions, gov­ern­ment agen­cies, and non­prof­it organizations.

1. What Do DEI Programs Aim to Achieve?

Diversity:

• Refers to rep­re­sen­ta­tion across a vari­ety of demo­graph­ic, expe­ri­en­tial, and cog­ni­tive dimen­sions, such as race, gen­der, eth­nic­i­ty, sex­u­al ori­en­ta­tion, socioe­co­nom­ic back­ground, phys­i­cal abil­i­ties, and even diver­si­ty of thought or perspectives.

Equity:

• Focus­es on fair­ness and elim­i­nat­ing bar­ri­ers that pre­vent indi­vid­u­als from access­ing opportunities.

• Rec­og­nizes that dif­fer­ent peo­ple may need dif­fer­ent resources or accom­mo­da­tions to achieve com­pa­ra­ble outcomes.

Inclusion:

• Ensures that indi­vid­u­als, regard­less of their back­ground, feel val­ued, respect­ed, and includ­ed in deci­sion-mak­ing processes.

• Goes beyond rep­re­sen­ta­tion and focus­es on fos­ter­ing an envi­ron­ment where diverse indi­vid­u­als can con­tribute meaningfully.

2. Examples of DEI Initiatives

• Train­ing Pro­grams: Work­shops on uncon­scious bias, cul­tur­al com­pe­ten­cy, and inclu­sive leadership.

Con­tin­ue read­ing What are Diver­si­ty, Equi­ty, and Inclu­sion (“DEI”) pro­grams? →
Artificial Intelligence, Employment policies, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Independent Contractors, Non-compete agreements, Wage and Hour Issues

Evolving Landscape of Employment Law: Key Updates for 2025

Leave a comment

If you’re an employ­er or an employ­ee, keep­ing up with employ­ment law changes can feel like chas­ing a mov­ing tar­get. With new court deci­sions, leg­isla­tive updates, and evolv­ing work­place norms, it’s more impor­tant than ever to stay informed. As we set­tle into 2025, here are some of the most sig­nif­i­cant devel­op­ments shap­ing employ­ment law across the country—and par­tic­u­lar­ly in West Virginia.

1. Remote Work and Wage & Hour Compliance

The pan­dem­ic may be in the rearview mir­ror, but remote and hybrid work are here to stay. That shift has raised fresh legal ques­tions, par­tic­u­lar­ly when it comes to wage and hour compliance.

A major trend we’re see­ing is increased scruti­ny from the U.S. Depart­ment of Labor (DOL) regard­ing remote work­ers’ over­time eli­gi­bil­i­ty. The Fair Labor Stan­dards Act (FLSA) requires employ­ers to track hours worked accu­rate­ly, but when employ­ees are log­ging in from home, com­pli­ance gets tricky. Employ­ers must ensure that non-exempt employ­ees are prop­er­ly record­ing breaks, over­time, and any “off-the-clock” work.

West Vir­ginia busi­ness­es with remote employ­ees should take a close look at their time-track­ing poli­cies to avoid poten­tial wage claims. Even an hon­est mistake—like fail­ing to count time spent respond­ing to emails after hours—can lead to cost­ly litigation.

2. Noncompete Agreements Under Fire

Non­com­pete agree­ments have been a hot-but­ton issue in recent years, and 2025 is shap­ing up to be a turn­ing point. The Fed­er­al Trade Com­mis­sion (FTC) issued a rule (April 2024) with a near­ly com­pre­hen­sive nation­wide ban on most non­com­pete claus­es, argu­ing that they sti­fle job mobil­i­ty and wage growth. 

I will dis­cuss below the legal chal­lenges to the FTC rule, but employ­ers should review their exist­ing agree­ments and con­sid­er whether non­com­petes are still enforce­able (in light of applic­a­ble state law and the prospect of the FTC rule sur­viv­ing legal attacks) or if alter­na­tive protections—such as con­fi­den­tial­i­ty and non­so­lic­i­ta­tion clauses—are a bet­ter approach.

Sta­tus of the FTC rule

Con­tin­ue read­ing Evolv­ing Land­scape of Employ­ment Law: Key Updates for 2025 →
Hostile work environment, Settlements, Sexual harassment, Taxes, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Congress against sexual harassment, part 1: Taxes

Leave a comment

This arti­cle is the first of 3 parts to cov­er 3 Acts of Con­gress direct­ed at expand­ing the rights of sex­u­al harass­ment and abuse victims. 

The series of 3 federal laws on sexual harassment claims

  • Con­gress first in 2017, with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”), lim­it­ed employ­er tax deduc­tions for set­tle­ments of sex­u­al harass­ment and abuse cas­es where the set­tle­ment agree­ment includ­ed a nondis­clo­sure agree­ment. That’s what this arti­cle is about.
  • Con­gress next in March 2022 passed the  End­ing Forced Arbi­tra­tion of Sex­u­al Assault and Harass­ment Act of 2021 which inval­i­dates arbi­tra­tion agree­ments over sex­u­al harass­ment and abuse claims, where the agree­ment is signed before a dis­pute arose. That’s my sec­ond arti­cle in this series.
  • Con­gress then in Decem­ber 2022 passed the Speak Out Act which inval­i­dat­ed nondis­clo­sure and non-dis­par­age­ment agree­ments in sex­u­al harass­ment and abuse claims where the agree­ments were pro­cured before a dis­pute arose. That’s my third arti­cle in this series.
Con­tin­ue read­ing Con­gress against sex­u­al harass­ment, part 1: Tax­es →
Age Discrimination, Americans with Disabilities Act, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

EEOC has updated its poster that employers must display

Leave a comment

The Unit­ed States Equal Employ­ment Oppor­tu­ni­ty Com­mis­sion (“EEOC”) has updat­ed its poster that employ­ers are required to dis­play in their work­places. Here is the EEOC’s web site on its poster. Here is an inter­net (HTML) copy of the poster. Here is the PDF of the print­able poster for wall dis­play. The name of the poster is “Know Your Rights: Work­place Dis­crim­i­na­tion is Illegal”.

The poster does a good job of edu­cat­ing employ­ees and employ­ers on essen­tial aspects of the fed­er­al anti-dis­crim­i­na­tion laws. It cov­ers what employ­ees are pro­tect­ed, what employ­ers are cov­ered, the pro­tect­ed char­ac­ter­is­tics about which the laws pro­hib­it dis­crim­i­na­tion, the deci­sions and con­duct of the employ­ers that are pro­hib­it­ed, and how an employ­ee can file a charge with the EEOC. In light of new­er tech­nol­o­gy, the poster has a QR code so an employ­ee can user a phone to jump straight to the EEOC’s web site for fil­ing a charge.

Con­tin­ue read­ing EEOC has updat­ed its poster that employ­ers must dis­play →
Contract Issues, Employee handbook, Employment at will rule

Handbooks and other ways to bypass the employment at will rule

Leave a comment

Part 2 of a series on West Virginia employment law

This arti­cle fol­lows up my pri­or blog arti­cle, The Employ­ment at Will Rule in West Vir­ginia. In that arti­cle, I explained the basic con­tours of the employ­ment at will rule.

With the employ­ment at will rule radi­at­ing in the back­ground, there are many ways it can be mod­i­fied or bypassed. All claims relat­ing to dis­crim­i­na­tion and retal­i­a­tion, for exam­ple, mod­i­fy the rule to the extent an excep­tion is cre­at­ed by which the employ­er may not ter­mi­nate the rule for a spe­cif­ic rea­son, such as age.

Scenarios: handbooks and other promises

But this arti­cle focus­es on con­trac­tu­al or con­tract-like lim­i­ta­tions on the employ­ment at will rule. The par­ties (employ­er and employ­ee) can enter into a for­mal employ­ment con­tract that mod­i­fies the employ­ment at will rule. But I am not address­ing that for­mal con­tract in this arti­cle. I am real­ly try­ing to focus on two scenarios:

Con­tin­ue read­ing Hand­books and oth­er ways to bypass the employ­ment at will rule →
Employee handbook, Employment at will rule

The employment at will rule in West Virginia

Leave a comment

Part 1 of a series on West Virginia employment law

This blog arti­cle is the first part of a series I will write on employ­ment law in West Vir­ginia, with a focus on lit­i­ga­tion issues relat­ing to alleged wrong­ful discharge. 

I will start with the employ­ment at will rule, and will car­ry through with arti­cles on the numer­ous excep­tions to the employ­ment at will rule.

What is the employment at will rule?

The courts have long had a love-hate rela­tion­ship with the employ­ment at will rule. West Vir­ginia, like vir­tu­al­ly all oth­er states, adheres to the rule.

So, what is the employ­ment at will rule? For con­ve­nience, I will define it in terms of the right to end or ter­mi­nate the employ­ment rela­tion­ship, but more about that def­i­n­i­tion in a moment. And more below about the big qual­i­fi­ca­tion on the rule.

One way to state the rule is that both par­ties to the employ­ment rela­tion­ship, the employ­er and the employ­er, have the right to ter­mi­nate the employ­ment rela­tion­ship at any time and for any rea­son (but not for an ille­gal rea­son, and that is dis­cussed below). It is impor­tant to under­stand that those are the two essen­tial attrib­ut­es of the rule: to ter­mi­nate the employ­ment rela­tion­ship (1) at any time, and (2) for any rea­son. Both sides (employ­er and employ­ee) have that right, although the right is almost always exam­ined in terms of the employ­er’s right in wrong­ful dis­charge litigation.

West Virginia’s description of the rule

In the con­text of ter­mi­na­tion (more about that lat­er) the employ­ment at will rule has been described in West Vir­ginia this way: the rule allows an employ­er to ter­mi­nate an employ­ee for:

Con­tin­ue read­ing The employ­ment at will rule in West Vir­ginia →