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

Employment Law

Make sure employees don’t work on breaks; burden’s on them to prove they did

06/11/2009

Here’s a bit of good news for employers trying to make sure they don’t violate the Fair Labor Standards Act: The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that employees—not employers—have the initial burden of showing they actually worked during unpaid lunch or other break periods.

Make firing decisions locally so possible lawsuit can’t morph into something larger

06/11/2009

Here’s added incentive to handle terminations and other employment actions at the local level. When employees sue, their attorneys often look to expand the lawsuit beyond one person. They’re trying to find larger patterns of discrimination. This strategy can sometimes succeed if higher-ups in the company made the decision and based it on a common policy or framework.

Employer’s perceived threat isn’t enough to excuse employee’s late discrimination filing

06/11/2009

Employees who want to file a discrimination complaint have to meet tight deadlines. They have just 90 days after receiving an EEOC “right-to-sue” letter to start their lawsuits. A perceived threat from an employer —such as a statement that it will “dig up” everything it can about the employee—doesn’t excuse missing the deadline.

Union pact overlaps with state law? Grievance comes first

06/11/2009

Are you a union employer with a collective-bargaining agreement that touches on labor issues also covered by the Minnesota Fair Labor Standards Act (MFLSA)? Then employees can’t go directly to court without first pursuing a union grievance.

Good news: Courts open to attorneys’ fees for employers

06/11/2009

Since employees get attorneys’ fees when a court determines employers violated their rights, it seems reasonable that employers should get attorneys’ fees when they have to waste time and money on frivolous litigation. It turns out some courts are beginning to entertain such requests.

Truth or just blowing smoke?

06/11/2009

Researchers from the University of Minnesota and Ohio State recently conducted a study to determine whether local laws requiring complete or partial smoking bans in bars and restaurants drive away customers, causing workers to lose their jobs. Bar and restaurant owners, who generally oppose smoking bans, have long argued that’s exactly what happens. The verdict?

With DHS cracking down, follow these I-9 best practices

06/11/2009

There’s a new I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification form for employers to complete when hiring employees and reverifying the employment eligibility of certain employees with temporary work authorization. Make sure you have a properly completed Form I-9 for every employee to avoid legal penalties for hiring unauthorized workers.

Should we contest? Fired for poor work, former employee now wants unemployment

06/11/2009

Q. After repeatedly warning an employee about her poor performance, we recently terminated her. At the termination meeting, she complained for the first time that she felt she’d been held to higher standards based on her gender. She has now filed for unemployment benefits. While we don’t think she’s entitled to the benefits, we wonder whether it makes sense to fight her claim. What do you think?

Reduced hours and WARN: Are we liable?

06/11/2009

Q. Due to the poor economy, we recently cut one of our manufacturing shift’s hours by 60%. This will continue indefinitely. We gave the affected employees two weeks’ advance notice, but we have now received a letter from an attorney claiming we should have given them 60 days’ advance notice. Is that right?

Counter bias claims with complete records

06/08/2009

These are tough economic times, and employers can’t be blamed for cost-cutting measures such as reductions in force. But before you act to trim your labor burden, prepare solid evidence showing exactly why you must cut those costs. You need a clear, written record, since those who participated in the decision-making may not be around to testify if the layoffs are challenged in lawsuits.