• The HR Specialist - Print Newsletter
  • HR Specialist: Employment Law
  • The HR Weekly

Discrimination / Harassment

N.J. Supreme Court decides: Can employees take confidential docs?

04/25/2011
Can an employee who wants to prove discrimination take, copy and dis­close company documents? How does that square with the company’s right to protect what it deems to be confidential information? The New Jersey Supreme Court ­recently offered some guidance on this issue in Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright.

EEOC ticked after tech firm reneges on agreement

04/25/2011
The EEOC is taking aim with both barrels at a Newark IT firm, HD Dimension Corp., after the company allegedly reneged on a conciliation agreement the commission brokered following accusations of discrimination.

NJLAD transgender protections could get first court test

04/25/2011
A man who underwent gender-reassignment treatment is suing his Camden employer in a case that could mark the first test of New Jersey Law Against Discrimination protections for transgender people.

Keep lawsuit clock on your side: Make sure employees know exact date of employment action

04/25/2011

Employees only have a short period of time to file their initial dis­crimi­na­tion claims. The clock starts ticking as soon as the employee knows or should have known about some material, potentially adverse job change. That’s why you need to be absolutely clear to employees when you make a job change—and note it in your files.

Beware retaliation long after bias complaint

04/25/2011

Think retaliation won’t be a problem because plenty of time has passed since an employee complained about alleged discrimination? Think again! Always be on the lookout for possible retaliation, no matter how long it has been since the initial complaint.

Medical exams: When can you require them?

04/25/2011

You may have heard that employers aren’t permitted to force employees to submit to medical exams because they could reveal a disability. And courts often see impromptu medical exams as thinly veiled attempts to push employees out the door. While pre-employment, pre-job-offer medical exams are barred, there are times when medical exams for existing employees are fine.

New bill would ban job bias based on unemployment status

04/22/2011
New Jersey this year became the first state to pass a law that forbids employers from requiring job applicants to be currently employed. Now legislation introduced in Congress—the Fair Employment Act of 2011—would amend Title VII to add “unemployed status” to the list of categories protected from job discrimination.

Are there any legal issues to consider now that we’re hiring only ‘careful’ workers?

04/20/2011
Q. Recently, several employees suffered work-related injuries shortly after we hired them. As a result, our workers’ compensation premiums have soared. The company’s CEO, in an effort to avoid this problem, has directed us to hire only “careful” workers in the future. Is this legal?

Federal government employer? You are liable for interest on back pay if you discriminate

04/20/2011
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Back Pay Act allows judges to order interest payments to federal government employees who win discrimination lawsuits if the employees were affected by “an unjustified or unwarranted personnel action which resulted in the withdrawal or reduction of all or part” of the employee’s pay.

Weed out substance abuse with ‘one-strike’ rule

04/20/2011
Many employers have adopted strict drug and alcohol testing programs for all new hires—and strictly bar employment of anyone who tests positive. Now the 9th Circuit has ruled that applying the rule to a recovering addict is legal unless that addict can somehow prove that the rule discriminates against a class of disabled individuals—namely, recovering addicts.