Mental health conditions can significantly affect employees’ behavior and performance at work—and when that happens, both employees and employers often struggle to understand their rights and responsibilities. At a recent Minnesota CLE presentation, “When Problematic Employee Behavior Stems from a Mental Health Condition,” Phillip Kitzer of Kitzer Rochel, PLLP joined Amy Conway of Stinson LLP and Dr. Andrea Lovett of MorningStar Psychological Services to discuss how mental health intersects with employment law.

The presentation explored how conditions such as depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, substance use disorders, and personality disorders can impact the workplace, and what legal protections apply under disability laws like the Minnesota Human Rights Act and the ADA. Employers have a duty to engage in an interactive process to identify reasonable accommodations—such as flexible schedules, quiet workspaces, or short-term leave—that allow employees to perform their essential job duties safely and effectively.

However, the law also sets boundaries. Employers do not have to excuse conduct that violates clear, consistently applied workplace policies or creates a direct safety risk. The key, the presenters emphasized, is consistency, documentation, and respect: treating employees fairly while ensuring workplace safety and accountability.

Kitzer Rochel represents employees who have been disciplined, denied accommodations, or terminated because of a mental health condition. If you believe your employer mishandled your situation or failed to accommodate your needs, our attorneys can help you understand your rights and pursue appropriate remedies. Visit www.kitzerrochel.com

At a recent continuing legal education program hosted by the Employment Law Institute of the Upper Midwest (ELI), Phillip Kitzer of Kitzer Rochel, PLLP joined Damien Riehl, Karen Odash, and moderator Jack Sullivan to present “Litigating Employment Cases When AI Is in Play.” The session explored how artificial intelligence tools are transforming workplace decisions—and how those changes are raising new challenges in employment litigation.

The presentation examined two common scenarios where AI is now influencing employment outcomes: hiring and termination. The panel discussed how algorithmic resume screeners and automated decision-making tools can create unintended bias or disparate impact, particularly in age and discrimination cases. They also addressed the risks of using generative AI in performance reviews or disciplinary documentation, where inaccuracies or “hallucinations” can expose employers to wrongful termination or spoliation claims.

Panelists shared practical strategies for both plaintiffs and defendants, including how to obtain and preserve AI-related evidence such as training data, prompts, and algorithmic outputs. They emphasized the importance of transparency in vendor contracts, documentation of AI use, and the ethical duty to ensure fairness and accountability when technology is involved in personnel decisions.

The takeaway: AI is not a shield against liability. Lawyers and employers alike must understand how these tools work, plan for discovery, and develop responsible AI policies to ensure fairness in the workplace.

Kitzer Rochel represents employees in complex employment disputes, including discrimination and wrongful termination cases involving AI or algorithmic decision-making. To learn more, visit www.kitzerrochel.com

Phillip Kitzer of Kitzer Rochel, PLLP recently co-authored a chapter in the newly published Internal Employment Investigations Handbook, released by Minnesota Continuing Legal Education (Minnesota CLE). The chapter, titled “Mistakes in Investigations and the Consequences,” examines how errors during workplace investigations can lead to serious legal exposure for employers and provides practical guidance for conducting thorough, fair, and legally compliant investigations.

The chapter explores the legal and ethical pitfalls that often arise in internal investigations, including defamation, retaliation, discrimination, privacy violations, and improper handling of electronic evidence. Through real-world hypotheticals and analysis, the authors illustrate how even well-intentioned investigations can go wrong—and how careful planning, neutrality, and adherence to best practices can prevent costly mistakes.

Phillip regularly advises and represents employees in retaliation, discrimination, and whistleblower claims that often involve flawed or biased investigations. His contribution to this handbook reflects his extensive experience litigating these issues and his commitment to improving fairness and accountability in workplace investigations.

To learn more about Phillip’s practice or to contact Kitzer Rochel, visit www.kitzerrochel.com