Have a Coke and a . . . Lawsuit
According to a mid-February press release issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency has sued Coca-Cola Beverages Northeast for sex discrimination. The EEOC’s lawsuit alleges that the company held a two-day employer-sponsored trip and networking event, which it only invited female employees to attend. The event included recreational activities and opportunities for career development, networking, a social reception and a roster of speakers including Jennifer Mann, President of the Coca-Cola North America Operating Unit.
According to the EEOC, after issuing invitations to only female employees, the company then proceeded to excuse the (female) attendees from their job duties for the duration of the two-day event while paying their normal wages without requiring them to use vacation time or other PTO. The EEOC alleges that Coca-Cola did not invite any male employees to attend the event. The underlying discrimination charge, and subsequent lawsuit, were initiated by a male production employee who argued that he and other male employees would have attended the event had their employer invited them.
As our recent updates have stressed, that’s exactly the kind of workplace discrimination the EEOC is intent on eradicating. Acting General Counsel of the EEOC, Catherine L. Eschbach commented on the suit, stating, “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has long made the exclusion of one protected class of employees from an employer-sponsored event a violation of the law,” and “[e]xcluding men from an employer-sponsored event is a Title VII violation that the EEOC will act to remedy through litigation when necessary.”
AI: Workforce Marvel or Workplace Menace?
In late February, Block—a company you may know because it runs Square, Cash App and After Pay—announced that it’s letting go 40% of its workforce. The reason its co-founder Jack Dorsey gave for the sudden layoffs? “Intelligence tools.”
After this staff-cutting measure, the company will go from 10,000 employees strong to just under 6,000 employees total. This may be a sign of upcoming trends across at least this industry: “A significantly smaller team, using the tools we’re building, can do more and do it better. And intelligence tool capabilities are compounding faster every week,” Dorsey wrote in a letter issued to shareholders. And his prediction is that “the majority of companies will reach the same conclusion and make similar structural changes.”
But companies that do decide to follow Block’s lead may be in for some consequences. As recent reporting indicates, the “advent of AI is accelerating” what some experts call an “entry-level apocalypse.” There simply aren’t enough entry-level jobs to teach new members of the workforce (whether recent college graduates or professionals switching careers) how to do the basic tasks of the job. As Fast Company reports, “[i]nternships, starter jobs, and junior roles, the indispensable on-ramps to white-collar careers, have been evaporating for several years due to cost pressures and post-pandemic belt-tightening.” Add to that trend employers adopting Block’s perspective and your company may be in for growing pains down the line when middle- and higher-level managers and leaders need to understand how the business runs from the ground up.
New Independent Contractor Guidance Released
On Feb. 27, the Department of Labor (DOL) proposed a new rule to guide employers who are trying to decide whether a worker can be classified as an independent contractor.
The proposed new rule makes it easier for businesses to classify workers as independent contractors than the 2024 Biden-era rule as it streamlines the six-factor test from the 2024 rule into a single critical inquiry, which asks: does the worker in question rely on the employer for their job, or do they run their own business? In other words, the rule focuses on economic dependence. As proposed, the rule also provides two core factors for employer consideration: (1) control over work (i.e., does the worker decide how, when, and for whom they work); and (2) the chance to make profits (i.e., can the worker make extra money—or lose profits—depending on how she manages her work, makes business choices or spends her own money?).
If this all rings a bell—that is, if it brings to mind the last independent-contractor classification test implemented by a Trump administration back in 2021, then you’ve got a good memory (and good instincts)! The 2026 proposed rule looks a lot like the “economic reality” test that was in place from 2021 to 2024. The DOL even re-invoked that exact phrase in its news release announcing the proposal.
