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

Employment Law

Class-Action suit could cost French firm over $300M

10/01/2007

Sanofi-aventis U.S., the American branch of a French pharmaceutical group, has been hit with a class-action sexual discrimination and harassment lawsuit. The four plaintiffs claim they were paid less and not promoted because of their gender. The women also say their bosses made unwelcome sexual comments and gestures, and management did not respond when they complained …

H-1B visa abuse costs Iselin tech company back wages, penalties

10/01/2007

The U.S. Labor Department has ordered Technologies500, of Iselin, to pay $537,189 in back wages to 36 computer programmers it hired under the H-1B visa program. The software company, also known as Cybersoftec.com, failed to pay the workers prevailing wages from January 2004 to November 2005. The department also levied fines of $162,750 …

FBI arrests mayors, other officials in bribe-Taking scandal

10/01/2007

When the FBI swooped in and arrested 11 public officials—including the mayors of Orange and Passaic—the allegations included massive corruption and bribery. Following an 18-month investigation, the FBI said it had extensive evidence that public officials at all levels were taking bribes in exchange for help securing public contracts. Many of the alleged bribes involved roofing and insurance contracts …

New Jersey cracks down on employers that misclassify employees

10/01/2007

Warning! Employers that intentionally misclassify employees as independent contractors face new penalties in New Jersey. Employers that intentionally misclassify workers unfairly stifle business competition because the practice lets them reduce labor costs between 15% and 20%, according to some estimates. That leaves employers that don’t cheat at a competitive disadvantage. Plus, employee misclassification strips workers of benefits and disability protection, and cheats the average taxpayer out of revenue …

Need to know: Avoid promising 100% secrecy

10/01/2007

HR often has vague policies for when they’ll share an employee’s confidential information. Fact: You can’t always promise an employee that her conversation with HR will be confidential.

‘Association’ with disabled no automatic assurance of leave

10/01/2007

The ADA makes it illegal to discriminate against employees because of their “association” with disabled people. But what about disciplining an employee for taking time off to care for the disabled person? According to a recent Pennsylvania case, that’s perfectly OK—as long as FMLA leave is not involved …

It’s OK to Force Admin Leave Pending Fact-Finding

10/01/2007

Sometimes, serious allegations—possible theft, sexual or racial harassment or violence—surface against employees. How you respond can be crucial to limiting your organization’s liability. The best response may be calling a timeout in the form of administrative leave pending an investigation. You can safely do so without fear that the move will generate even more litigation from a suspected wrongdoer …

Getting along without employee on FMLA leave? Go ahead and terminate

10/01/2007

When an employee goes on FMLA leave, someone has to do the work. What if that someone easily assumes the employee’s duties and does a great job? Can you use that fortuitous realization as the basis for firing the leave-taker when he returns? Perhaps, but there’s a risk. The employee may sue, alleging the real reason he was let go was retaliation for taking leave, and not that you figured out the company could get along just fine without him …

Isolated incident or slight doesn’t add up to retaliation

10/01/2007

No matter what you do, the workplace will never be free of tensions and annoyances. Although it’s a good idea to encourage courtesy and cordiality, you don’t have to worry that every little slight might come back in the form of a lawsuit …

False move can revive expired claim—As retaliation

10/01/2007

Employers nationwide breathed a sigh of relief when the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that employees must promptly bring discrimination claims. But the decision in the Ledbetter case isn’t as simple as press coverage may have suggested. In fact, any move a supervisor makes that could be interpreted as retaliation for the earlier, expired claim may be seen as retaliation for earlier complaints …