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

Employment Law

Offhand remarks don’t prove age discrimination

05/17/2010

Employees can’t win age discrimination lawsuits based solely on an offhand remark referring to an employee’s age. That’s because, unlike many other forms of employment discrimination, age discrimination cases require employees to prove that age was the reason for termination or some other negative employment action. Unless there’s more evidence, a mere comment isn’t enough.

FMLA notice: Rely on what you know–not policy

05/17/2010

A good sick leave policy includes rules governing how employees are supposed to let their employers know that they’re ill. Employees generally have to follow those rules or face discipline. But there are circumstances under which employees may be excused from following the rules. One of those exceptions: when the employer has direct notice that the employee is ill and may need FMLA leave.

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.

To pay or not to pay interns? The DOL is cracking down

05/17/2010
Two factors have fueled a sharp rise in unpaid internships: Employers’ continuing need to hold down costs and the drop in the number of paying jobs for young people. But before you get too excited about using that free labor source, take note: The DOL and many state labor departments say they are stepping up enforcement and fines against employers that illegally don’t pay their interns.

Do we have to compensate employees who answer pagers off-the-clock?

05/14/2010
Q. We require certain employees to be on-call for customer service needs that arise after hours. Employees carry a pager while on-call, and are expected to respond to pages right away. Do we have to pay our employees regular wages, or a minimum number of hours and overtime for being on call?

How far can we go to discipline employees for criticizing us online?

05/14/2010
Q. Under our social media policy, we prohibit employees from disparaging our company in any social medium. Two of our employees recently uploaded a video to YouTube in which they criticize our safety record and say we don’t pay good wages. Can we terminate these employees for this activity?

Can we refuse to hire member of National Guard because she lacks weekend scheduling flexibility?

05/14/2010
Q. Can we refuse to hire a qualified applicant who has told us her National Guard duty conflicts with some of the weekends she would be required to work? Employees in this job bid for rotating scheduled weekends under a union contract seniority system. The applicant’s schedule for Guard duty is not flexible.

How to decide: Should employers arbitrate workplace disputes?

05/14/2010
Is arbitration the best forum in which employers should try to resolve statutory claims. Significantly, some employers have begun to abandon mandatory arbitration in recent years. Here are some of the issues employers must consider when deciding whether to require arbitration of employees’ statutory claims.

Commercial pilots claim FAA retirement plan broke state law

05/14/2010

When Congress raised the mandatory retirement age for commercial pilots from 60 to 65, not all pilots were pleased. Pilots who had been forced to retire under the 60-years-of-age rule were not grandfathered into the new system. Now the pilots are seeking back pay and lost wages under state laws and the Federal Tort Claims Act.

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.