CWC has filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the National Labor Relations Board arguing that the Board’s so-called “Boeing” standard that is used to balance employer and employee rights when determining whether an employer policy violates federal l

Our brief submitted in support of the High Court taking up this case argues that the appeals court misinterpreted both the Federal Arbitration Act and Supreme Court precedent in ruling that an arbitrator could impose class arbitration even though the

Our brief to the High Court argues the Ninth Circuit got it very wrong in ruling that prior salary, either “alone or in combination with other factors,” can never justify a wage differential under the Equal Pay Act, regardless of whether it was appli

The NLRB is asking interested parties to weigh in on whether to change its standard that protects racially offensive speech when uttered in the context of exercising labor law rights, even where it conflicts with an employer’s nondiscrimination oblig

Our brief to the High Court argues that the Ninth Circuit got it wrong when it ruled that plaintiffs bringing a race discrimination claim under “Section 1981” have a less stringent burden of proof than the statute requires.

By design, the Americans with Disabilities Act requires an individualized assessment of whether a person is subject to the law’s protection. Nevertheless, a federal trial court somehow found that a class of more than 7,000 current and former employee

In a case with similarities to the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Dukes v. Wal-Mart, the plaintiffs here are seeking to bring a huge Title VII class action. Our brief to the Ninth Circuit argues that the same rationale that was applied in Dukes

Our brief urges the Justices to reverse a longstanding rule that allows the courts to defer to an agency’s sub-regulatory interpretation of its own unclear regulation, contending that the rule encourages agencies to make significant policy pronouncem

CWC’s friend-of-the-court brief asks the full Fifth Circuit to reconsider and reverse a three-judge panel ruling that we contend badly misinterprets the ADA’s direct threat defense, making it harder for an employer to prove direct threat and increasi

Our brief argues that a lower court got it wrong in finding that an arbitrator should decide whether an arbitration agreement provided for class arbitration. We contend instead that under Supreme Court precedent, that decision should have been up to