Many of you have seen the rat on the right. Well, maybe not that particular rat, but a large inflatable rat, nonetheless. Usually, a union will position the large rodent in front of a business or job site as part of a protest effort.
But, just because a union uses it as a protest symbol doesn’t make it legal. Does it?
Is the rat even legal?
Find out after the jump.
* * *
Teachers, do you know what to do if a student or parent sends you a Facebook “friend” request?
If you answered, “accept it,” then you should keep reading after the jump.
A 51-year-old auto-parts specialist with lupus, fibromyalgia, diabetes and arthritis, claimed that his 29-year-old co-worker called him an “old cripple” and an “old man,” labeled him “too old to be trained,” and threatened to beat him with a baseball bat.
The 51-year-old responded by telling his manager that he would kick the 29-year-old’s ass and then came to work with a handgun in his car.
Wha Wha Whaaaaaat?!?!
Did the older employee overreact? Maybe. But was he the victim of a hostile work environment?
Find out after the jump.
Last week, I reported that a Pennsylvania state court had ruled that a plaintiff did not have to provide access to her Facebook page during discovery by accepting a “friend” request from defense counsel. That same week, another Pennsylvania state court was asked to resolve whether a plaintiff’s “privacy rights” would trump a defendant’s request to access the plaintiff’s Facebook and MySpace accounts to discover facts relating to the plaintiff’s claim for damages.
Pennsylvania has become a hotbed of social-media-discovery litigation. Who knew?
I break down the latest decision, which I predict will be a “go-to” for defendants and courts alike, after the jump.
As I previously reported, on May 9, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board issued a Complaint, in which it alleges that a NY non-profit company fired five employees for complaining on Facebook about working conditions. Now, Law 360 reports that the NLRB has issued a second complaint against a Chicago-area luxury car dealership alleging the company ran afoul of federal labor laws by firing a sales employee over a message he posted on Facebook.
Molly DiBianca at The Delaware Employment Law Blog brought this second complaint to my attention and you can read her write-up on it here.
Last week, Governor Christie signed the “New Jersey First Act,” a bill that will require all NJ public employees hired after September 1, 2011 to live in New Jersey. Current public workers will not be affected. New hires will have up to a year to move.
***I would have reported this last week. But, then there was that masturbating Brazilian accountant thing. C’est la vie.***
Can a company create and enforce a policy that requires employees on paid sick leave to remain close to their homes, unless they obtain the company’s permission?
Would that policy infringe on an employee’s FMLA rights?
Good questions.
The answers are after the jump.
The NLRB has issued a press release and much has already been written about this Complaint by some great employment-law bloggers. So be sure to check out the links below:
- “NLRB Issues Another Complaint Against An Employer For Facebook-Related Terminations” by Seth Borden at Labor Relations Today
If, in a pending civil action, the defendant requests to Facebook “friend” the plaintiff in order to learn more about the plaintiff’s claims, must the plaintiff accept the friend request?
This is precisely the issue that a PA Court of Common Pleas recently faced.
So, what happened? Find out after the jump.
The Employer Handbook Blog