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

Discrimination / Harassment

Don’t turn the other cheek on workplace bullies

01/11/2011

Workplace bullying has existed for as long as mean people have worked alongside others. Only recently, however, has it emerged as an issue for the courts to handle — it’s now a significant liability hazard for employers. Here’s how to institute a “no-jerks” rule at work that can help stop bullies.

Orlando man tries to take bite out of Apple

01/11/2011
Apple Computer’s hip youth culture may have met its match in Michael Katz, a former employee who is suing the company for age bias.

Federal appeals court runs out of patience, cracks down on frivolous litigation

01/11/2011
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over Florida employers, has started cracking down on employees who file false and frivolous claims. It’s losing patience for the attorneys who represent them, too. That may mean fewer such cases in the near future.

When religion is crux of workplace problems, base discipline on behavior–not belief

01/11/2011
Warn managers and supervisors: They must not refer to an employee’s religious beliefs when taking any adverse employment action. That’s true even if the decision being discussed involves a dispute over a religious accommodation.

Use robust anti-bias policy to limit liability

01/11/2011
Here’s an all-too-frequent scenario: Misconduct leads to discipline, perhaps even discharge. Then the employee sues, alleging that for years, he’s been subjected to harassment on account of a protected characteristic. Don’t let that happen to you.

SCLC gets involved in Dana Corp. discrimination claims

01/11/2011
Bishop Richard E. Cox, president of the Dayton chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and a member of the group’s national board, has intervened in a dispute between Maumee-based Dana Corp., the union that represents workers there and black current and former employees.

Kaplan colleges sued for screening with credit histories

01/11/2011

The EEOC has filed suit against Kaplan Higher Education Corp., alleging its use of credit histories to screen job applicants has a disparate impact on blacks. The credit histories aren’t necessary, the EEOC says, and don’t predict whether the applicant will perform the job well. Kaplan has defended the practice as a way to protect the company against potential fraud and theft.

Nail down specific dates to defeat late lawsuits

01/11/2011
Courts are losing patience with former employees who wait to sue an employer—as long as the employer can produce concrete proof that the employee filed too late.

Disparate impact not enough to prove age discrimination

01/11/2011
Employees can challenge employment practices based on the disparate impact they have on a protected class. When that class consists of older workers, employers can save themselves by showing that a reasonable factor other than age motivated the policy.

When the EEOC is on the prowl, it may be time to consider settling

01/11/2011

The EEOC doesn’t often sue on behalf of employees. Instead, it generally relies on private attorneys to file lawsuits. When the EEOC does sue, it’s usually because it has spotted what it believes is a case of widespread discrimination. Faced with a possible class-action suit, it may make sense for employers to settle.