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

Terminations

Settlement offer can’t be used against you later

12/22/2009

Offering an employee a severance payment in exchange for releasing any legal claims won’t be used against you. Courts want to encourage dispute settlement—and if severance offers could be used against employers later in court, cases would rarely be settled.

Use statistics early to blow shaky lawsuits out of water

12/22/2009

Employees who sue for discrimination have to come up with some evidence before the case can advance beyond the initial stages—and before it gets progressively more expensive for employers paying the legal bill. Employers that fight back right away with statistics showing there was no discrimination can save big bucks in the long run.

OK to tie incentives to continued employment

12/22/2009

The Supreme Court of California has ruled that employers are free to develop incentive payment plans that reward loyalty by requiring employees to stay for a period of time before earning the full benefit.

Design restrictive agreements that protect you—and stick in court

12/15/2009

Do you rely on restrictive agreements (also known as noncompete agreements) to prevent employees from working for the competition and stealing your customers? If so, now is a good time to make sure those agreements will stand up in court.
A recent 11th Circuit Court of Appeals case, Proudfoot Consulting Co. v. Gordon, illustrates the obstacles and complexity that can trip up employers that take former employees to court.

Step up to a new high-stakes HR role: Stamping out conspiracies to discriminate

12/15/2009

Here’s another legal danger for HR to watch out for: The charge that a supervisor conspired to terminate employees belonging to a protected class. Employees who can show that a supervisor and someone else involved in a termination decision conspired to terminate employees of a particular race, sex or other protected classification have a separate claim beyond the traditional employment law remedies.

Is an employee’s refusal to cooperate with an internal investigation a firing offense?

12/14/2009

Q. We have an employee who has declined to cooperate in a workplace investigation into an issue that could threaten our company’s operations. Can we terminate the employee for insubordination?

Remind supervisors: Don’t assume disability

12/11/2009

An employer that assumes an employee is disabled and then fires him or even just treats him differently than other employees may end up with an ADA lawsuit. That’s because the employee may not actually be disabled—but can still sue for disability discrimination based on the employer’s presumption that he is.

Employees who don’t meet whistle-blower law requirements still have legal protection

12/11/2009

The Illinois Whistleblower Act says that employers may not retaliate against employees who disclose to a government or law enforcement agency information about alleged violations of state or federal laws and regulations. But what about employees who don’t go to an agency, but raise their concerns internally?

You can’t go wrong with a solid discharge reason

12/11/2009

You never know which employee will sue you, when or why. Everyone can probably find some reason good enough to get past the courthouse door. It’s your job to make sure you can send them right back out. The best way to do that: Always have a solid reason for disciplinary action.

Take sexual harassment complaints seriously—even if they involve past lovers

12/09/2009

Some employers wrongly believe that when co-workers end what was a consensual sexual relationship, one employee can’t later claim sexual harassment for post-breakup conduct. The dubious assumption: Any subsequent unpleasant contact between the employees was probably based on jealousy or anger over the broken relationship rather than “on account of sex.” That’s not always true.