ELB
Showing 193–208 of 258 results
-
Applicant’s failed drug test leads to questionable inquiries
July / August 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 553
Abstract: When a temporary employee failed a drug test after applying for a tech position, he was questioned by the Medical Review Officer in the presence of a supervisor. The applicant’s claim that the test results were based on an allowable prescription passed muster, and the MRO cleared the tech. But the supervisor told HR not to prepare an offer and instructed the temp agency that the tech was not to return to the company. The tech sued, claiming that the company had made an improper pre-employment medical inquiry. An appeals court explained why he was right.
-
Is a disability an excuse for bad workplace behavior?
July / August 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 927
Abstract: An employee who puts a poster of Charles Manson in his cubicle and uses a company computer to surf Web sites about serial killers and assault weapons may seem a sure and justifiable target for termination. After this employee, claiming bipolar disorder, filed a lawsuit alleging that the company had failed to provide him with an accommodation, a U.S. district court weighed in.
-
The Fair Labor Standards Act – Overtime case turns on employee’s sales activities
July / August 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 962
Abstract: Besides meeting a salary requirement, an employee must primarily perform work directly related to management policies or business operations in order to be exempt under Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) standards. When a terminated ad salesperson charged that her company had failed to pay her overtime, an appeals court examined whether she was an administrative employee for the purposes of the FLSA and, thus, exempt from its overtime provisions. The judges ruled no, but a sidebar to this article looks at a case with a different outcome.
-
Stereotypes: Inadvisable – Hotel chain greeted with unwelcome sex discrimination case
July / August 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 621
Abstract: A hotel clerk was promoted on the basis of good performance, but when a Director of Operations saw her, she told the manager that the clerk lacked the “Midwestern girl look.” After the clerk was eventually fired, she filed a sex discrimination suit. Although appearance can play a role in some employment decisions, an appeals court found for the clerk.
-
A not uncommon quandary – Another employee vs. independent contractor case to consider
May / June 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 738
Abstract: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit had to decide whether welders for an electrical contractor were employees entitled to overtime or independent contractors. The court noted that the facts appeared to be evenly balanced between employee and independent contractor status, but weighed a number of factors before siding with the employees. A sidebar discusses legal contexts for this recurring “employee vs. contractor” dispute.
-
Is a leave of absence a “reasonable accommodation”?
May / June 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 770
Abstract: The “reasonable accommodation” clause of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is the crux of many a legal argument. Such was the case involving a paper inspector who had developed a bone spur. After lengthy periods of time off and light-duty work, he accepted disability retirement — and then sued, alleging disability discrimination.
-
Age discrimination case involves stolen property
May / June 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 889
Abstract: A company fired a tool crib attendant after an internal investigation produced evidence that he’d stolen company property for his own financial gain. The 56-year-old plaintiff commenced an age-discrimination lawsuit. He established that the company had made the charge over a year after the firing, and that a number of younger employees weren’t fired — despite their alleged complicity in the theft. The court permitted a trial on the age discrimination claim. A sidebar discusses another age-discrimination case involving an employee who’d complained about a salary freeze.
-
Before and after: Employee commute drives FLSA case
May / June 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 711
Abstract: A technician filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for time spent commuting to job sites in company vehicles and for time spent on preliminary and follow-up activities performed at home. In the first instance, he claimed that the commute amounted to a condition of his employment and he was required to use the company vehicle, which he couldn’t use for personal pursuits. The court disagreed, and also rejected his claim regarding his preliminary off-the-clock activities. But his follow-up activity — sending a transmission to his superiors concerning all the jobs he’d performed that day — was another matter.
-
Two things that don’t usually go together – Age discrimination meets technology misuse
March / April 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 712
Abstract: Age discrimination and the misuse of technology are no strangers to the employment law arena. But one recent case brought the two together. An older worker was fired — and replaced by a younger worker — for allegedly accessing prohibited Web sites, even though the company’s log book of the infractions didn’t always correspond with the employee’s presence at work. But the appeals court found that his actual innocence of his employer’s proffered accusation was irrelevant as long as the employer reasonably believed it and acted on it in good faith.
-
How does state of mind affect giving FMLA notice?
March / April 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 893
Abstract: To invoke the protection of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), an employee must give his or her employer sufficient and proper notice. But how does an employee’s alleged state of mind affect that invocation? In one case, when a worker stated he’d had a nervous breakdown, the supervisor believed he was intoxicated and making unacceptable excuses for missing work. After more absences, the worker was demoted, and he eventually quit — and sued, claiming that that the company had interfered with his rights under the FMLA. An appeals court disagreed.
-
ADA case turns on participation in accommodation process
March / April 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 495
Abstract: The accommodation process is a key part of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). But who’s at fault when the single accommodation offered is rejected and no other alternatives are discussed? This was the situation in a case involving a worker who was exposed to chemical fumes as a part of her job, but who rejected an accommodation without offering an alternative.
-
Silence is costly – Plaintiff’s inaction key in racial discrimination case
March / April 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 966
Abstract: When an African-American worker experienced several episodes of racial harassment, management took a number of steps to nip it in the bud, and the HR representative asked the worker to keep him informed of any further incidents. Such incidents continued, but the worker kept silent. He eventually quit and then sued, alleging that he’d been subjected to a racially hostile work environment and constructively discharged. This article discusses an appeals court’s findings, while a sidebar discusses a different outcome in a similar harassment case.
-
Reduction in force or age-based discrimination?
January / February 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 682
Abstract: When a reduction in force (RIF) affects an employee in a protected class, it’s not unusual for a discrimination claim to arise. When an employee in his mid-50s was among several workers laid off following a merger, he sued on the grounds of age discrimination. The employee tried to show discrimination both directly and indirectly, but the employer prevailed — largely because it had thoroughly analyzed the merits and deficiencies of those who were under consideration for the reduction and was able to support its process through objective evidence.
-
Imputing ugly staff conduct to the employer
January / February 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 702
Abstract: When an African-American woman moved to a company’s Inside Sales department, she found that her co-workers routinely referred to women in sexually and racially derogatory terms. She complained to her superiors, including the company president. Some steps were taken to halt the harassment, yet it persisted. The key question before the court was whether the harassment could be imputable to the employer. Had it done enough to try to stop the abusive behavior?
-
Ignorance isn’t bliss for employer in FMLA lawsuit
January / February 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 511
Abstract: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was passed into law to allow employees to take unpaid leave when facing a serious health crisis. But when a supervisor is ignorant of its protections, a lawsuit can result, as one company discovered. An employee who had taken six weeks of FMLA leave was dismissed by her supervisor. During the proceedings, the court found the employer’s claims of poor performance unconvincing in light of their previous appraisals, and her supervisor admitted he’d had no prior knowledge of FMLA requirements.
-
SOX and suits – Whistleblower provisions at issue in retaliatory termination case
January / February 2010
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 1128
Abstract: Shortly after a husband and wife, both lawyers for the same firm, pointed out that information about a competitor’s patent had not been revealed in the company’s recent merger — thereby possibly causing the company to be overvalued — they found themselves out of a job. They filed a lawsuit claiming retaliatory termination and citing the whistleblower provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX). This article discusses the four-prong test that they successfully met to make their case. A sidebar discusses a different case that showed how employers can raise valid defenses to SOX whistleblower retaliation claims.