[Redacted], Karen S., 1 Complainant, v. Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration), Agency.

10 Cited authorities

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
411 U.S. 792 (1973) Cited 52,440 times 95 Legal Analyses
Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision
U.S. Postal Service Bd. of Govs. v. Aikens
460 U.S. 711 (1983) Cited 2,407 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination
Furnco Construction Corp. v. Waters
438 U.S. 567 (1978) Cited 2,165 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a district court was "entitled to consider the racial mix of the work force when trying to make the determination as to motivation" in the employment discrimination context
Section 791 - Employment of individuals with disabilities
29 U.S.C. § 791 Cited 2,276 times 6 Legal Analyses
Adopting standards for ADA claims under § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, including 42 U.S.C. § 12112, which forbids discrimination "against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability . . ."
Section 1630.14 - Medical examinations and inquiries specifically permitted
29 C.F.R. § 1630.14 Cited 234 times 41 Legal Analyses
Providing that medical examinations would be deemed involuntary under ADA if employee's participation has effect of greater than 30% of total cost of "self-only" health coverage, and that insurance safe harbor does not apply to wellness programs
Section 1614.110 - Final action by agencies
29 C.F.R. § 1614.110 Cited 226 times 1 Legal Analyses
Compelling final decision “within 60 days of the end of the 30-day period for the complainant to request a hearing . . . where the complainant has not requested [one]”
Section 1614.604 - Filing and computation of time
29 C.F.R. § 1614.604 Cited 137 times 1 Legal Analyses
Providing the time limits applicable to the subject regulations "are subject to waiver, estoppel and equitable tolling"
Section 1614.405 - Decisions on appeals
29 C.F.R. § 1614.405 Cited 81 times 3 Legal Analyses
Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"
Section 1630.13 - Prohibited medical examinations and inquiries
29 C.F.R. § 1630.13 Cited 59 times 2 Legal Analyses
Stating the general rule that, except as permitted by 29 C.F.R. § 1630.14, "it is unlawful for a covered entity to require a medical examination of an employee"
Section 1614.403 - How to appeal
29 C.F.R. § 1614.403 Cited 34 times
Indicating that failure to file timely appeal requires dismissal by EEOC

[Redacted], Karen S., 1 Complainant, v. Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration), Agency.

10 Cited authorities

Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision

Holding that because "[t]here will seldom be `eyewitness' testimony to the employer's mental process," evidence of the employer's discriminatory attitude in general is relevant and admissible to prove discrimination

Holding that a district court was "entitled to consider the racial mix of the work force when trying to make the determination as to motivation" in the employment discrimination context

Adopting standards for ADA claims under § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, including 42 U.S.C. § 12112, which forbids discrimination "against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability . . ."

Providing that medical examinations would be deemed involuntary under ADA if employee's participation has effect of greater than 30% of total cost of "self-only" health coverage, and that insurance safe harbor does not apply to wellness programs

Compelling final decision “within 60 days of the end of the 30-day period for the complainant to request a hearing . . . where the complainant has not requested [one]”

Providing the time limits applicable to the subject regulations "are subject to waiver, estoppel and equitable tolling"

Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"

Stating the general rule that, except as permitted by 29 C.F.R. § 1630.14, "it is unlawful for a covered entity to require a medical examination of an employee"

Indicating that failure to file timely appeal requires dismissal by EEOC