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

Employment Law

Feel free to reassign employees if it’s justified—you won’t be liable for retaliation

06/12/2009

Ever since the Supreme Court decided the White v. Burlington Northern case in 2004, retaliation lawsuits have been all the rage. But lately there’s been good news for employers. Courts have been refining the retaliation standard for almost five years and have begun concluding that truly minor work changes aren’t retaliation.

Check bankruptcy cases when sued—you just might win a quick dismissal

06/12/2009

Employees who file for bankruptcy are supposed to list all their assets in their bankruptcy petitions, including pending lawsuits or potential lawsuit claims. That’s because creditors may be entitled to a share of those assets to satisfy debts. The reason: It’s unfair to creditors for someone to discharge their debts and then collect a million-dollar judgment from her employer.

Warn managers and supervisors: No negative talk about military service

06/12/2009

Here’s a good way to avoid litigation: Warn all your supervisors and managers that bad-mouthing an employee’s military service can spell trouble. That’s because any disciplinary action following such talk could be viewed as evidence military service was a factor in the decision.

Always consider how jury might see retroactive actions

06/12/2009

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in a long-running case that a jury acted properly when it concluded an employer’s retroactive termination of health insurance violated the FMLA.

Declining to cooperate with investigation isn’t protected

06/12/2009

Before an employee can sue for retaliation, she has to show she participated in some form of protected activity—filing an EEOC or internal discrimination complaint, for example. But what about refusing to cooperate with an employer’s investigation?

You’re now strictly liable for supervisor sexual harassment

06/12/2009

In a significant ruling interpreting the Illinois Human Rights Act, the Illinois Supreme Court recently expanded employers’ potential exposure to sexual harassment claims and damages by holding that an employer is strictly liable for sexual harassment committed by a supervisor, even if the supervisor does not directly supervise the employee who is harassed.

Does the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act protect employees other than women?

06/12/2009

Q. Carlos, a longtime Latino employee, frequently complains that he is paid less than his white, non-Latino counterparts. He blames this pay discrepancy on a previous supervisor who allegedly denied him several promotions in the late 1990s because of his national origin. I have heard about the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Could it affect us in this case?

Bias settlement chips $500,000 out of Ceisel Masonry

06/12/2009

Suburban Chicago-based Ceisel Masonry has settled a race and national-origin discrimination suit with the EEOC for $500,000.

Track all efforts to accommodate disabilities

06/11/2009

Employers have an obligation to engage with disabled employees in an interactive accommodations process. But exactly how do you go about proving you complied when the employee says you didn’t try to help? Your best approach is to track all your efforts to accommodate, including every contact with the employee, whether by phone, e-mail, memo or snail mail.

Telling truth about ex-worker isn’t defamation

06/11/2009

When talking to a former employee’s prospective new employer, are you afraid to provide truthful information or state an opinion? Doing so probably won’t earn you a defamation lawsuit in Minnesota.