Course Information
Course Description
This CLE program, presented by Vincent M. Rizzo of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, will focus on practical guidance for employment lawyers on LGBTQ workplace issues, including a discussion on the practical impact of the anticipated US Supreme Court decisions in Bostock v. Clayton County, Zarda v. Altitude Express, and Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC, which will interpret Title VII to either include or exclude LGBTQ individuals from Title VII's protections. The course will also look briefly at each state’s employment nondiscrimination laws and then provide valuable insight on workplace compliance with current federal laws.
Learning Objectives :
-
Educate employment lawyers on the current law as it relates to LGBTQ employees
-
Examine the practical impact of relevant Supreme Court cases: R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. EEOC; Zarda v. Altitude Express; and Bostock v. Clayton County
-
Survey employment nondiscrimination laws by state and examine how the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions impact state laws
-
Identify best practices for workplace compliance, with a discussion of important topics such as personnel records, employee handbooks, bathroom policies, dress codes, and codes of conduct
-
Review how to promote understanding of the language of LGBTQ employees
Credit Information
Faculty
Vincent Rizzo
Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP
Vincent Rizzo focuses his practice in litigation at both the federal and state level, with a particular emphasis in the area of government and employment law. Vincent has extensive experience representing entities and employees in claims arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. He has litigated countless cases to resolution including successfully trying several high-profile federal civil jury trials to defense verdict and obtaining a number of significant summary judgments. Vincent also advises employers and employees on all aspects of the employment relationship, spanning from hire through termination, employee misconduct and other disciplinary matters. He regularly presents trainings to clients on workplace compliance and best practices.
Professional Background
Before joining Hinshaw, Vincent was an Assistant Corporation Counsel for the City of Chicago Department of Law for nearly five years. In that capacity, he represented the City of Chicago in municipal prosecutions, appeals and civil rights litigation including Section 1983 and Monell claims.
During law school, Vincent was a public interest law intern for the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and also interned for the general counsel of Accident Fund Insurance Company. In addition to his academic accomplishments, he was a teaching assistant for Legal Research, Writing and Advocacy; Torts; and Street Law. Vincent was also an active member of his law school's International Law Review and participated in the Commercial Arbitration Competition and the National Animal Law Appellate Moot Court Competition.
Professional Affiliations
Vincent serves as the co-president of the Cook County Bar Association's LGBTQ section, co-chair of the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues Network of the ABA Section of International Law, a member of the leadership council for Lambda Legal, and is secretary of the executive board of the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, one of the largest and most well-respected LGBT bar organizations in the country. He also is a pro-bono volunteer for the Chicago Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights, representing low-income plaintiffs in labor and employment matters and volunteers for the name change project, providing free legal name change services to transgender people.
Reviews
Very timely presentation.
I enjoyed it.
Good job!
Thank you!
Good
liked the summaries of points
Easy to listen to and very informative. I got a lot out of it.
great subject
Great CLE!
Excellent presentation of the brand new SCOTUS decision on Title VII and its implications