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

Discrimination / Harassment

Disciplinary mistake? Set it right–pronto!

05/17/2010

We all make mistakes, especially when acting in haste. Unfortunately, a mistake in the employment law world can mean an expensive lawsuit. But courts are inclined to forgive employers that genuinely try to make things right. That’s why employers should fix errors and make sure they remove any potential negative effects of disciplinary actions.

Minnesota’s own ‘equal rights amendment’ moves forward

05/14/2010
The Minnesota Senate will hold hearings on the Constitutional Amendment for Equality (CAFE), a state-level equivalent of the federal Equal Rights Amendment that failed to win ratification in the 1970s and ’80s. In a statement, Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party legislators said the amendment to the Minnesota constitution would protect women’s rights in ways statutes can’t.

Massive Walmart class action moves forward

05/14/2010

It’s the employment law case everyone is watching. A massive, long-running gender pay discrimination class action against Walmart has overcome another hurdle on its way to what could become the largest payout to employees in U.S. history. The plaintiffs—potentially 1.5 million women who have worked at 3,400 Walmart stores—got a victory in April when the full panel 9th Circuit Court of Appeals gave the go-ahead for the case to proceed.

 

Good news if you’re facing class action: Courts balk at letting classes snowball

05/14/2010

It’s one of the worst HR nightmares possible: One disgruntled employee claims she represents hundreds or thousands of employees who have allegedly suffered discrimination. What was a single case suddenly grows into a huge, companywide class-action lawsuit—with a price tag that has suddenly grown exponentially. Fortunately, federal courts handling Minnesota cases seem to be stepping back from the brink. They’re not approving as many class-action requests.

Employee thinks he has you over a barrel? If it sounds like extortion, fire him!

05/14/2010

You know that you can’t retaliate against an employee who, in good faith, complains about alleged discrimination. That’s true even if it turns out that he was wrong and no discrimination actually occurred. The key there is “good faith.” It’s not retaliation to fire someone who is simply trying to extort a benefit by making a frivolous complaint.

Beware the cat’s paw: How innocent decisions create liability

05/11/2010

It comes as a bolt out of the blue: The Florida Commission on Human Relations notifies you that there’s “reasonable cause” to believe retaliation was the reason a female employee lost out on a promotion to a male co-worker. But it was a clean promotion process! How did this happen? As it turns out, this is the “cat’s paw” doctrine at work.

BofA, Merrill face sex bias lawsuit following merger

05/11/2010

Bank of America took control of a lot of toxic assets when it purchased brokerage house Merrill Lynch in 2008. Part of the poison was apparently a litigious workforce that couldn’t wait to meet its new co-workers. Two Florida women are part of a sex discrimination lawsuit claiming that the combined companies treat their female financial advisors like “second-class citizens.”

After decade in court, at least the lawyers can claim victory

05/11/2010
Faced with what you consider a meritless employee lawsuit, it’s often tempting to fight it out in court as a matter of principle. But at some point, it’s better to cut your losses and settle. The only parties that benefit from 10-year legal battles are lawyers, as the following case shows.

Caught on tape: Bias evidence against 2 firms

05/11/2010
Nationwide staffing company Administaff has agreed to settle an EEOC religious discrimination lawsuit stemming from an ugly series of incidents that occurred at one of Florida-based cable-TV company Conn-X’s facilities. The allegations created a perfect storm of co-employer liability: video technology plus employee thuggery added up to evidence that practically begged for an out-of-court settlement.

Firing after delivery can still be pregnancy discrimination

05/11/2010
Here’s an employer argument that didn’t work: It couldn’t have been pregnancy discrimination when we fired her because she wasn’t pregnant anymore.