Rebecca L. Springer
Overview
Companies, both large and small, turn to Rebecca for advice on the complex employment issues that keep their legal and human resources staff up at night. From ensuring compliance with the wide range of obligations for government contractors, to conducting sensitive and high-profile investigations, to navigating the “alphabet soup” of federal and state employment laws, Rebecca serves as a trusted resource and partner to her clients.
Career & Education
- The White House
Assistant to the Counselor to the President
- The White House
- Duke University School of Law, J.D.
- Washington University in St. Louis, B.A.
- District of Columbia
- Virginia
Rebecca's Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25
On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the "background circumstances" rule that would require majority-group plaintiffs to meet a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII discrimination cases. The decision vacated and remanded the case for further consideration by the Sixth Circuit. In so doing, the Court held that all plaintiffs – whether minority or majority employees – bringing discrimination cases under Title VII are subject to the same evidentiary standards under the McDonnell Douglas framework for evaluating disparate-treatment claims.
Podcast | 01.24.25
Insights
- |
09.26.23
Employee Relations Law Journal
OFCCP Launches Three New Initiatives Impacting Its Relationship With Contractors
|05.01.19
Pratt's Government Contracting Law
Labor & Employment – Repeals and Rollbacks are Likely
|05.09.17
Crowell & Moring's Regulatory Forecast 2017
The Pro Bono Effect: Nonprofits, Small Businesses Can Benefit From Training
|01.11.16
Washington Lawyer
- |
05.27.15
Crowell & Moring's Government Contracts Legal Forum
Rebecca's Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25
On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the "background circumstances" rule that would require majority-group plaintiffs to meet a heightened evidentiary standard in Title VII discrimination cases. The decision vacated and remanded the case for further consideration by the Sixth Circuit. In so doing, the Court held that all plaintiffs – whether minority or majority employees – bringing discrimination cases under Title VII are subject to the same evidentiary standards under the McDonnell Douglas framework for evaluating disparate-treatment claims.
Podcast | 01.24.25