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

Discrimination / Harassment

In interviews, be wary of using ‘points only’ scoring system

04/17/2009

Do you assign points or scores to rank candidates during their interviews? If so, do you explain in writing why the applicant received each score? A new court ruling says you’d better back up those numbers with an explanation or you might just lose points in front of a jury if you’re sued for discrimination.

How to respond to an EEOC complaint: 10 steps to success

04/17/2009

The EEOC and state and local agencies have been filing more administrative charges in recent years. As the recession deepens and more people lose their jobs, that trend is likely to continue. Because administrative charges can be precursors to discrimination lawsuits, it’s critical for you to handle them properly. These 10 tips will help you prepare to respond:

Unholy trinity: 3 employees for the price of one

04/14/2009

Religious accommodation went up against business necessity recently when the "Three Faces of Eve" butted heads with an employer in court. Find out how many winners there were.

Assessing witness credibility in workplace investigations

04/14/2009

During a workplace investigation, you, as an HR investigator, can take a number of practical steps to improve the reliability and objectivity of your witness credibility assessments. Four factors are critical to assessing witness credibility: demeanor, consistency, chronology, and past history and motivations.

Document warnings to chronically late worker

04/14/2009

Your documentation of an employee’s chronic tardiness will prove its value if you fire the employee and she sues for some kind of discrimination. If you can show you let the employee know about your concerns and the consequences, rest assured she would have a hard time winning her case.

When religion causes a problem—or three—show why accommodating is a hardship

04/14/2009

Sometimes, employees claim protection from religious discrimination based on very unconventional beliefs. No matter how unusual, employers must reasonably accommodate those beliefs unless doing so causes an undue hardship. Employers should be prepared to show why it would be a hardship before terminating the employee.

Craft broad settlement language to thwart 2nd lawsuit

04/14/2009

Employers that decide to settle harassment and discrimination claims, take note. The broader the settlement agreement language, the less likely the employee will turn around and file a new lawsuit. Always have an attorney approve settlement terms to make sure they are as broad as possible.

Discrimination difference: Unfair not always illegal

04/14/2009

We’d all like to think we run a fair workplace. But people are imperfect, and supervisors sometimes aren’t fair. It’s only when that unfairness harms members of a protected class that the practice is illegal.

Solid salary plan beats equal pay lawsuits

04/14/2009

If you haven’t looked carefully at how you determine compensation, here is another reason to do so soon. Employers that can show a court they set salaries based on logical, fair and unbiased factors are likely to win Equal Pay Act lawsuits. That’s because the EPA outlaws sex discrimination in pay, but allows employers to use factors other than sex to set pay rates.

Consent doesn’t mean it wasn’t harassment

04/14/2009

Employers sometimes mistakenly believe that consensual sexual activity between a subordinate and a supervisor isn’t sexual harassment. That’s simply not the case. As long as the activity was unwelcome, it doesn’t matter if the employee being targeted agreed to the supervisor’s demands. Fear or threats of losing one’s job can be enough to force an employee to “consent.”