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

Employment Law

New employee not working out? Have hiring manager handle the firing

12/09/2009

Sometimes, you have to take a chance on a job applicant because the candidate pool isn’t filled with as much talent as you would like. Everyone knows picking a marginal candidate can turn out to be a mistake. If you find you have to terminate such an employee, have the same person who made the hiring decision also make the termination decision. That reduces the chance of a costly discrimination lawsuit …

Beware professional exemption if college degree isn’t required

12/09/2009

Before concluding that a white-collar and seemingly professional skilled and scientific job is exempt from overtime, get expert advice. Blindly deciding that the job is exempt may mean trouble down the line.

Eaton Neck Fire Department settles age discrimination suit

12/09/2009

The Eaton Neck Fire Department agreed to settle an EEOC age discrimination suit that challenged the department’s practice of not allowing the time firefighters serve after their 65th birthdays to count toward length-of-service awards. And those awards are critical to firefighters because they’re used to calculate pension benefits.

Thomas Subaru settles hostile environment claim

12/09/2009

Long Island car dealership Thomas Subaru settled with the EEOC after three women complained about a pervasive hostile work environment. All three had been terminated after complaining of unwanted touching, sexually explicit and degrading comments and pornography in the workplace.

Do you need a ‘no forwarding’ e-mail policy?

12/09/2009

Here’s a potential electronic communications problem you may not have considered. An employee who forwards e-mail from a company computer and e-mail account to his personal address may end up using those e-mails later in litigation against the company. That’s one reason it makes sense to prohibit employees from forwarding e-mails to their personal e-mail accounts.

Downsizing? Transfers cut unemployment claims

12/09/2009

These are tough economic times and lots of employers find themselves having to make difficult financial decisions. When those decisions include shutting down a store or branch location, employees who lose their jobs may be eligible for unemployment. But when former employees collect unemployment, unemployment insurance costs go up for employers. One way to cut your potential unemployment comp liability is to offer the employees a transfer to another location.

Misconceptions about disabled employee’s medical condition can spell ADA trouble

12/09/2009

Many medical conditions aren’t disabling, so they don’t qualify for protection under the ADA. That’s because they don’t actually impair a major life activity like walking, breathing, taking care of oneself or working. But sometimes employers mistakenly believe that a medical condition is disabling when it’s not. If they express those beliefs, they may make themselves vulnerable to a “regarded as disabled” lawsuit.

Double-check all commission agreements! You could be liable for more than you think

12/09/2009

If you pay commissions under a written compensation plan that covers commissions earned only while the employee works for your company, be careful how you handle terminations—and discussion concerning payment of further commissions. In some circumstances, you could inadvertently create additional liability for unpaid commissions …

Court says ‘First things first’: No EEOC complaint means no federal lawsuit

12/09/2009

A federal trial court has refused to open the litigation floodgates for former employees who go directly to federal court instead of following the proper procedures before suing. Employees who want to sue for employment discrimination under Title VII are supposed to file a complaint with the EEOC or a state discrimination agency first.

Some relatives now eligible for unemployment compensation

12/09/2009

Until recently, people employed in small businesses owned by their close relatives weren’t eligible for unemployment compensation. However, in late 2008, the Legislature changed the law to allow benefits if the relative had worked for the business for at least 16 quarters and earned more than $7,500 per quarter.