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

Employment Law

Inappropriate info on old applications

02/01/2008

Q. I was recently hired as the first-ever HR director for a company that has been in business for more than 40 years. While reviewing employee files, I was aghast to find applications from the late ’70s and early ’80s asking very inappropriate questions—the applicant’s political party, religious faith and even family planning goals. I know times have changed, and the company’s applications have been EEO-compliant for more than 20 years. But I worry that the company will get in trouble with the EEOC or other government agencies if the old applications are found in our files. Should I have older employees who filled out the inappropriate applications all those years ago complete and submit current EEO-compliant applications? …

You don’t have to ‘Accommodate’ offensive proselytizing

02/01/2008

Employers often have to balance the rights of divergent protected groups in ways that seem impossible. Consider what happens when a local ordinance says you cannot discriminate against an employee based on sexual orientation, while state and federal law says you cannot discriminate against someone for a sincerely held religious belief …

When discouraged applicants sue, don’t ‘Blacklist’ them

02/01/2008

Here’s a trap you should be aware of: An applicant who sues when he isn’t hired often keeps on applying—and then turns around and claims that you “blacklisted” him in retaliation for the lawsuit. Here’s how you should respond …

Don’t assume—It’s up to employee to raise disability issues

02/01/2008

Do you suspect an employee may have a mental or psychological disability that may need accommodation—even though he hasn’t mentioned it? Tread carefully. If you assume the employee is disabled and he’s not, he’ll be able to sue you for regarding him as disabled. Here’s the best way to handle the matter …

Warning: Winning in state court doesn’t mean you can’t be sued in federal court

02/01/2008

It may seem terribly unfair, but an angry employee with a discrimination ax to grind may sue your organization in multiple forums for almost exactly the same alleged offense. That’s one good reason to get an attorney involved right away. Your lawyer can push early on to consolidate all the claims into one …

Emotional fallout from harassment may be a separate claim

02/01/2008

As if you didn’t have enough to worry about when it comes to sexual harassment in the workplace. Now a federal court has ruled that Pennsylvania law allows harassed employees to sue their employers for intentional infliction of emotional distress, too …

CVS fined for child labor, overtime and timecard violations

02/01/2008

CVS Caremark Corp. was fined $226,000 by the U.S. Labor Department for changing employee timecards and violating child labor laws. The department found 43 violations at stores in Pennsylvania and six other states …

$17,000 brightens day for Worthington mushroom workers

02/01/2008

A group of fired Thai workers have settled an unpaid-wages lawsuit with Creekside Mushrooms of Worthington. The mushroom grower will pay $17,376 in back wages to four workers …

Demoting workers who belong to a protected class

02/01/2008
Q. When making demotion decisions—especially those involving employees in protected classes—what factors should an employer take into consideration to avoid legal backlash?

Responding to mold allergy illness complaints

02/01/2008
Q. We have an employee who claims she feels sick whenever she is at work. She attributes it to a mold allergy. What should I do?