1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Trina Fairley Barlow

Trina Fairley Barlow

Partner | She/Her/Hers
Partner | She/Her/Hers
dGJhcmxvd0Bjcm93ZWxsLmNvbQ==
VCardLinkedIn
VCardLinkedIn

Areas of Focus

Overview

Employers at risk of high stakes litigation and dealing with sensitive investigations involving key personnel turn to Trina to minimize their legal risk, navigate changing legislative landscapes, win cases and protect their brand. Government contractors in highly regulated industries partner with Trina to comply with the myriad complex labor and employment laws and regulations unique to companies doing business with the federal government.

Trina has successfully defended clients in single plaintiff, class, and collective action cases in all phases of litigation. Her experience includes litigating cases before federal and state courts, administrative agencies, and other tribunals in cases arising under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, Equal Pay Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, and a host of other federal and state laws. She has prevailed on behalf of employers in cases involving breach of contract, non-competition agreements, misappropriation of proprietary information claims, and other business torts. In addition to being a zealous advocate in the courtroom, Trina always has her client’s business objectives top of mind and seeks to find solutions through collaboration and agreed upon strategy, evaluating at every step the risk-reward equation.  

Trina’s extensive investigations experience includes leading large internal investigations of alleged discrimination, sexual harassment, hostile work environment, retaliation, wage and hour, whistleblower, and ethics complaints that frequently involve senior leadership and claims of systemic discrimination and retaliation. Where necessary, Trina also collaborates with clients to investigate and respond to governmental inquiries. Trina’s investigations practice includes helping clients implement corrective actions and strategies in response to workplace complaints and conducting privileged analyses of companies’ complaint and investigations procedures in order to help clients better understand their legal exposure and identify best practices.  

Trina’s experience advising federal government contractors on essential employment and compliance issues includes advising them on the requirements of the Service Contract Act and the Davis-Bacon Act, and representing clients in investigations and litigation before the Department of Labor. She has also successfully defended and advised clients in whistleblower retaliation cases arising under the False Claims Act, National Defense Authorization Act, the Defense Contract Whistleblower Protection Act, and various state whistleblower protection laws.

Trina is co-chair of Crowell’s Labor and Employment practice group, a member of the Government Contracts Group, and a member of the firm’s Management Board. She is also a Chambers USA-ranked attorney, and a 2023 Lawyers of Color Wonderful Women honoree.

Career & Education

|

    • University of Virginia, B.A.
    • The George Washington University Law School, J.D.
    • University of Virginia, B.A.
    • The George Washington University Law School, J.D.

    • District of Columbia
    • Maryland
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
    • District of Columbia
    • Maryland
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
    • U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
    • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas

Trina's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.10.24

Supreme Court to Address Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Title VII Claims

On Friday, October 4, 2024, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in an appeal from the Sixth Circuit decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a Title VII case involving claims of reverse sexual orientation discrimination.  Plaintiff Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, alleges that she was demoted and replaced by a gay man and was also denied a promotion in favor of a gay woman because of her sexual orientation.  The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer-defendant, holding that—to establish a prima-facie case under Title VII as a member of the majority—in addition to the “usual” showing Plaintiff was required to make an additional showing of “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.” 87 F.4th 822, 825 (6th Cir. 2023) (citation omitted). The Court observed that such a showing is typically made with evidence that the minority group (here, gay people) made the challenged employment decision or with statistical evidence showing a pattern of discrimination by the employer against members of the majority group—neither of which Plaintiff satisfied....

View All Insights

Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.10.24

Supreme Court to Address Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Title VII Claims

Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.01.24

Nationwide Injunction Halts Key Provisions of Davis-Bacon Act Regulations

Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.28.24

State Attorneys General Spar Over ABA's Diversity Standard

Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.26.24

The Evolving Landscape of Title IX Protections in Education
|

View All Insights

Practices

Industries

Trina's Insights

Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.10.24

Supreme Court to Address Standard for “Reverse Discrimination” Title VII Claims

On Friday, October 4, 2024, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in an appeal from the Sixth Circuit decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a Title VII case involving claims of reverse sexual orientation discrimination.  Plaintiff Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, alleges that she was demoted and replaced by a gay man and was also denied a promotion in favor of a gay woman because of her sexual orientation.  The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer-defendant, holding that—to establish a prima-facie case under Title VII as a member of the majority—in addition to the “usual” showing Plaintiff was required to make an additional showing of “background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.” 87 F.4th 822, 825 (6th Cir. 2023) (citation omitted). The Court observed that such a showing is typically made with evidence that the minority group (here, gay people) made the challenged employment decision or with statistical evidence showing a pattern of discrimination by the employer against members of the majority group—neither of which Plaintiff satisfied....

View All Insights