The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) prohibits employers of all types and sizes from discriminating against applicants and employees based on uniformed service, which includes service in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Coast Guard, the Guard and Reserve components of military services, and the Commissioned Corps of the Public Health Service. The law grants strong reemployment rights and protections for service members returning to their civilian jobs. READ MORE
Jeffrey J. Lorek
Jeffrey J. Lorek brings a decade of military officer leadership skills to Orrick, combining them with a former JAG prosecutor's courtroom finesse and years of labor and employment litigation experience to win clients' battles. His "anytime, anywhere" approach to problem-solving helps Orrick's clients overcome the toughest challenges in employment law.
Mr. Lorek is Special Counsel in Orrick’s Employment Law and Litigation practice group. A trial lawyer with broad experience in the areas of employment and traditional labor law, Mr. Lorek has practiced before state and federal courts, the EEOC, and other administrative tribunals. Mr. Lorek advises and represents clients with respect to employment contract and compensation disputes, trade secrets, employee mobility and restrictive covenants , employment discrimination, reasonable accommodations, workplace harassment and hostile work environment, whistleblower matters, military affairs and national security matters, and traditional labor-management relations. He has published several articles on related matters.
Prior to joining Orrick, Mr. Lorek served at Headquarters U.S. Air Force as the Chief, Employment Litigation-East Branch, where he led an eight-member team in defending the Air Force worldwide in hundreds of employment litigation matters, including discrimination suits, whistleblower protection cases and employee disciplinary actions. He also previously served as Deputy Chief of the Air Force’s Labor Relations Branch where he oversaw a team of traditional labor attorneys handling the defense of all unfair labor practice (ULP) charges against the Agency, collective bargaining issues, and grievances and arbitrations nationwide. Mr. Lorek wrote the Air Force's guide to security-clearance related disciplinary actions, often advising the Air Force General Counsel's office as a security clearance subject-matter expert.
Mr. Lorek served as an active duty Air Force JAG for ten years, during which time he tried 25 criminal bench and jury trials and eight administrative discharge board hearings. He has substantial trial experience prosecuting sexual assaults and aggravated assaults, child pornography offenses, larcenies and financial crimes. Mr. Lorek is a decorated veteran of foreign wars, having deployed three times in support of combat operations, including tours to Afghanistan and Qatar as a fiscal law attorney with Headquarters, U.S. Forces Afghanistan, as the Deputy Staff Judge Advocate in support of refueling operations during the Libyan war, and as the Chief of Administrative Law for Joint Task Force Guantanamo. He also continues to serve as a Deputy Staff Judge Advocate in the Maryland Air National Guard.
From 2004-2009, Mr. Lorek practiced law in private firms in the areas of bank and lender liability, employment litigation, commercial litigation, products liability and toxic torts.
Posts by: Jeffrey Lorek
On April 22, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in a trio of employment discrimination cases for which the Court’s forthcoming rulings—expected to be published by June 2020—could ultimately settle whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The three cases that the high court agreed to hear are Bostock v. Clayton Cnty. Bd. of Comm’rs, No. 17-1618 (filed May 25, 2018), Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, No. 17-1623 (filed May 29, 2018), and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al., No. 18-107 (filed July 20, 2018). The first two cases involve sexual orientation specifically, while the third case pertains to gender identity. READ MORE