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

Terminations

Employers can’t get restraining orders on clients’ behalf

01/13/2010

When employees quit, they often want to remain friends with their former colleagues and clients. Usually that’s fine, but sometimes it’s not in co-workers’ or clients’ best interests. That doesn’t mean, however, that the former employer can get a restraining order against the employee who quit.

Settlement brings soft landing for Mesaba religious bias case

01/13/2010

Mesaba Airlines, which operates short-haul flights for Delta and Northwest Airlines, has reached an agreement with the EEOC on religious discrimination claims filed by several employees. The suit began when Mesaba fired customer service agent Linda Vellejos after she refused to work on the Jewish Sabbath.

Hennepin County driver files religious accommodation suit

01/13/2010

The tension between an employee’s right to religious accommodation and an employer’s need to get work done is at the heart of a case being heard in Hennepin County. A Seventh-day Adventist was fired after refusing to work between sundown on Friday and sundown on Saturday, the Adventists’ Sabbath.

How to guarantee a lawsuit: Terminate only older workers during reduction in force

01/13/2010

Are you planning a reduction in force due to the poor economy? If so, double-check who is going to lose their jobs, paying particular attention to whether the burden falls predominantly on workers over age 40. If that is the case, make absolutely certain you have legitimate business reasons to back up your decision to fire them.

New York revives ‘early-outs’ for state employees

01/12/2010

In an attempt to close a gaping state deficit, New York Budget Director Robert Megna has told government agencies to offer early-retirement packages to state employees. The state made a similar offer earlier in 2009, and 1,100 workers took that option before it expired in early November.

Think worker can’t take FMLA? Run the numbers

01/11/2010

Before you decide to fire a troublesome employee for missing work because the absences aren’t covered by the FMLA, double-check your math. In one recent case, the employer fired a “poor-performing” employee but cited a dubious reason: She was frequently absent to care for her father and wasn’t yet eligible for FMLA leave. In fact, it turned out she was eligible and the court wouldn’t buy any of the other discharge reasons.

Under new FMLA rules, think twice before automatically firing workers who don’t call in

01/11/2010

The new FMLA regulations say employers can enforce their usual call-in rules, such as requiring employees to call in before missing a shift. That rule change made employers rejoice, assuming they could safely discharge employees who didn’t show up and didn’t call in. But a new case calls that assumption into question.

Not all harassers need immediate firing

01/11/2010

If you have a robust anti-harassment policy and act fast to stop co-worker sexual harassment, you usually won’t be liable for that harassment. But that doesn’t mean you must automatically fire everyone who harasses a co-worker. You can use a more measured approach, including warnings and counseling. If that doesn’t work, then it may be time to terminate the perpetrator.

Firing employee who complained of harassment? Don’t let alleged harasser play any role

01/11/2010

Here’s a rule of thumb to follow: An alleged harasser should have no part in a later termination decision involving his or her accuser. Giving the alleged harasser any role in the firing is almost certain to spur a retaliation lawsuit, even if it turns out the harassment claim doesn’t stick.

Wasted at work? You don’t have to tolerate it!

01/11/2010

Some employers foolishly worry that they may violate the ADA or the FMLA if they enforce a zero-tolerance policy that forbids employees to work under the influence of alcohol. The simple reality is that employers have every right to expect workers to show up sober in the morning. Furthermore, being an alcoholic is no excuse.