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

Terminations

Return-to-work denial might be retaliation

04/25/2011
Some employers seem to think they can force troublesome employees to give up and quit by making work life miserable. The more likely result: a lawsuit.

Keep lawsuit clock on your side: Make sure employees know exact date of employment action

04/25/2011

Employees only have a short period of time to file their initial dis­crimi­na­tion claims. The clock starts ticking as soon as the employee knows or should have known about some material, potentially adverse job change. That’s why you need to be absolutely clear to employees when you make a job change—and note it in your files.

Supreme Court’s big retaliation ruling already a factor

04/19/2011
When the U.S. Supreme Court speaks, employers better listen! The ink was barely dry on the High Court’s retaliation decision in Thompson v. North American Stainless when a federal judge considering a Florida case expanded the opinion’s reach.

Double-check employee ID records! No-match letters are back

04/19/2011
After a three-year hiatus, the Social Security Administration has resumed sending no-match letters to employers, alerting them when employees’ Social Security numbers don’t correspond to numbers in the SSA’s database. Because the feds have offered no guidance on what no-match letters mean these days, experts fear confusion for employers.

Showing sympathy doesn’t create ADA liability

04/18/2011
Employees who turn out not to meet the definition of “disabled” can still sue for disability discrimination based on their employer’s perception that they are disabled. That doesn’t mean, however, that supervisors can’t express concern and sympathy when an employee reveals a problem. Nor does it mean they can’t offer accommodations at that point or explain what types of leave are available.

Audit all discipline to ensure fairness, equity

04/15/2011

You never know where the next lawsuit will come from. That’s powerful incentive to make sure you treat all employees fairly. A simple self-audit of discipline can prevent many lawsuits.

How not to handle FMLA leave: Bank learns the hard way that following the law isn’t optional

04/15/2011

Some employers believe that pregnant women aren’t entitled to time off for pregnancy-related matters because pregnant women aren’t disabled or unable to perform their jobs. That’s wrong and can land employers in big trouble. The fact is that prenatal visits and even bouts of nausea are the sorts of things that Congress considered when covering pregnancy under the FMLA.

OK to base discipline on severity of violation

04/15/2011
Employers generally must treat employees equally, including when they break the rules. But that doesn’t mean you have no disciplinary flexibility. The key: Explain why you think one employee deserves more serious punishment than another who committed the same infraction.

Employee complained about discrimination? That doesn’t excuse shoddy or dangerous work

04/15/2011

Employees who file EEOC or other complaints about discrimination are protected from retaliation for doing so. But that doesn’t mean employers aren’t allowed to discipline employees who have complained—if the situation legitimately calls for discipline. You must, however, be very careful to document the underlying reasons.

Accommodate disabled workers, but don’t accept mediocre job performance

04/15/2011

Yes, employers must reasonably accom­modate employees with disabilities. But that doesn’t mean they have to provide a perfect workplace—or tolerate subpar performance. Instead, make the accommodations that are reasonable. If the employee still can’t perform her job’s essential functions, you can terminate her.