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

Terminations

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.

New employee not working out? Have hiring manager handle the firing

12/09/2009

Sometimes, you have to take a chance on a job applicant because the candidate pool isn’t filled with as much talent as you would like. Everyone knows picking a marginal candidate can turn out to be a mistake. If you find you have to terminate such an employee, have the same person who made the hiring decision also make the termination decision. That reduces the chance of a costly discrimination lawsuit …

Double-check all commission agreements! You could be liable for more than you think

12/09/2009

If you pay commissions under a written compensation plan that covers commissions earned only while the employee works for your company, be careful how you handle terminations—and discussion concerning payment of further commissions. In some circumstances, you could inadvertently create additional liability for unpaid commissions …

DEED: Half of employers shirking WARN Act obligations

12/09/2009

Businesses that plan to lay off enough workers to trigger the federal WARN Act must give 60 days’ notice to employees and state officials. That’s supposed to allow state Rapid Response teams enough time to start helping find new jobs for soon-to-be displaced workers. But the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) says in many cases employer cooperation is grudging at best.

Take these 4 steps before you implement a reduction in force

12/09/2009

As the recession continues, many employers have had to turn to reductions in force as an unfortunate yet necessary cost-saving measure. Count on some of those former employees to sue. Employers considering implementing RIFs must understand the legal and practical issues that can trap the unwary. Taking these four steps can minimize the risks of lawsuits:

Bosses need to know: They’re personally liable for discrimination under Ohio law

12/08/2009

Here’s an incentive for managers and supervisors to avoid doing anything that smacks of possible discrimination. While federal civil rights laws generally don’t make managers and supervisors personally liable for discrimination, Ohio state law does. That should be a powerful incentive for line managers and supervisors to avoid creating a hostile work environment.

Are there alternatives to noncompete agreements?

12/08/2009

Q. I have certain employees that I don’t want leaving my business to work for a competitor. I am leery about using a noncompetition agreement because I know that courts can be hostile toward them. I understand they can cost a lot of money in legal fees to enforce. Are there any alternatives for me to consider?

Warn managers: Don’t make assumptions about pregnant employee’s capabilities

12/08/2009

HR professionals must make sure that supervisors hear this message loud and clear: Don’t make any assumptions about what a pregnant woman can or cannot do. Voicing such presumptions and taking action based on them virtually guarantees a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit.

Porn on shared computer? Enforce log-in, log-out rules

12/07/2009

Your computer-usage policy no doubt prohibits visiting inappropriate web sites. But what if someone surfs forbidden sites using a computer that a group of employees has access to? In such cases, investigate but make sure to check out everyone’s story.

Have those who do the hiring also do the firing

12/04/2009

Here’s one of the easiest ways to reduce your chances of losing a race discrimination lawsuit: Make sure the same person or group who chose to hire an employee in the first place also makes the decision to terminate her. That makes it much harder for the employee to show she was fired for a discriminatory reason.