Law and the Workplace
Photo of Keisha-Ann Gray

Keisha-Ann Gray

Keisha-Ann G. Gray is a distinguished litigator and trial lawyer who has secured significant victories in federal and state courts (jury trial and otherwise) for organizations facing “bet the company”, high-reaching, reputational risk claims. An award-winning partner in Proskauer’s renowned Labor & Employment department and co-chair of the Firm’s Workplace Investigations practice group, she advises clients on high-stakes employment litigation and complex investigations matters. As important social change movements like Black Lives Matter, #MeToo and LGBTQ Pride continue to shape society and businesses, Keisha-Ann is the go-to advisor when addressing issues related to discrimination, harassment and/or lack of diversity.

With 20+ years in practice, Keisha-Ann frequently speaks and trains on employment matters such as litigation and trial practice, conducting effective investigations (the trauma-based approach), Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, and Anti-Discrimination/Anti-Harassment. Her “real talk” style of delivery provides clients with actionable and practical best practice solutions to today’s most challenging workplace issues.

Prior to joining Proskauer, Keisha-Ann served as an Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of New York and federal law clerk in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico.  The breadth of Keisha-Ann’s experience and background in federal government, coupled with her tenure in private practice as a Big Law partner and employment litigator, gives her the unique ability to meaningfully connect with diverse groups of people. This skill enables her to advocate effectively and successfully (in and out of the courtroom) for her clients. As a result, Keisha-Ann is also frequently called upon to conduct high-profile internal investigations. Because of her unique and varied skill set, clients routinely engage Keisha-Ann to handle their most sensitive matters which, due to her involvement, often successfully result in non-public, confidential resolutions – precisely the mandate required by her clients.

Keisha-Ann enjoys giving back to the community and profession by serving as a member of the Mayor’s Advisory Committee on the Judiciary. She also serves on the Board of the Attorney Grievance Committee for the NY Supreme Court Appellate Division, 1st Department, the Board of the Federal Bar Council, and the Board of the Eastern District Association. In addition, Keisha-Ann co-Chairs the Federal Bar Council’s Employment Litigation Committee, and mentors junior female attorneys and junior attorneys of color.

Subscribe to all posts by Keisha-Ann Gray

Customized Anti-Harassment Training for the #MeToo Era

We offer companies a suite of customized, in-person training modules including practical approaches and solutions to harassment and discrimination in the workplace. These training programs incorporate your particular workplace policies and are supported by brand new videos that are based on real workplace incidents. We explore the most pressing issues faced by employers today, including not only those … Continue Reading

Top Five Proactive Ways for Start-Ups to Avoid HR Nightmares

Unless you’ve been under a rock, the fact that many start-ups have recently found themselves on the wrong side of the litigation or threatened litigation “v.” should not surprise you. In fact, it is often the very things that make start-ups so appealing – their laid back culture, open floor plans, no dress code, lack … Continue Reading

Connecticut Expands Anti-Discrimination and Accommodation Protections for Pregnant Employees and Applicants

Earlier this month, Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy has signed into law “An Act Concerning Pregnant Women in the Workplace” (the “Act”), which enhances employment protections for pregnant employees and applicants under the state’s existing anti-discrimination law. The expanded protections amend the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (“CFEPA”) and will go into effect October 1, 2017. … Continue Reading

Update: NYC Mayor Signs Caregiver Discrimination Bill into Law

On January 5, 2016, Mayor Bill de Blasio signed into law a New York City Council bill that prohibits employment discrimination based on an individual’s actual or perceived status as a caregiver. The new law will come into effect on May 4, 2016. To fully review the coming changes, see our blog post here. Employers … Continue Reading

New York City Council Passes Caregiver Discrimination Bill

On Wednesday, December 16, 2015, the New York City Council voted 49-0 in favor of Int. No. 108-A, legislation that amends the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”) to prohibit employment discrimination based on an individual’s actual or perceived status as a caregiver.  It is now awaiting the Mayor’s signature. Under the NYCHRL, it … Continue Reading

Judge Limits In-House Attorney Privilege in MasterCard Ruling

On August 25, 2014, Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn of the Southern District of New York issued an order compelling MasterCard to produce several documents that the company had previously identified as privileged. The plaintiff in the ongoing contract dispute, International Cards Company, Ltd., challenged MasterCard’s privilege log, which led Judge Netburn to instruct MasterCard to … Continue Reading

Employers To Face More Concurrent EEOC and Tort Suits after Second Circuit Decision

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has joined the Seventh and Ninth Circuits in holding that an EEOC charge will not toll the statute of limitations on a state-law tort claim. This decision likely will lead to an increase in concurrent filings of state-law tort claims and Title VII federal administrative proceedings … Continue Reading

No Longer a “Motivating Factor”: E.D.N.Y. Rules New “But-For” Causation Standard for Retaliation Retroactive

Employers who have recently suffered defeats on Title VII retaliation claims now have reason to ask for reconsideration under applicable rules.  The Eastern District of New York, in Sass v. MTA Bus Co.,   ruled that existing cases should no longer be subject to a “motivating factor” analysis, but rather, are retroactively subject to the “but-for” … Continue Reading
LexBlog

Proskauer and our platform provider LexBlog each use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze traffic. Each of us also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. If you are happy for us to store these cookies on your device please click ‘Accept Cookies.' For more information, please see here and here.

OK