Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s Samantha Gray. Samantha is a freelance writer/researcher for www.BachelorsDegreeOnline.com. Her articles cover issues related both to online and traditional education, as well as student lifestyle, careers and business. Please send any questions or comments her way at SamanthaGray024@gmail.com.
(Want to guest blog at The Employer Handbook? Email me.)
mmmmmmmmmmmmwah!
What is the fluctuating workweek method of overtime compensation? Why is it no longer good in PA? And why should you care?
I answer all of these hard-hitting questions — like a BOSS — after the jump…
Last week, we had a two-part series on the interplay between the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The former clearly obligates employers to afford leave to an eligible employee to care for a sick child. But, what about the latter? That is, must an employer provide leave from work as a reasonable accommodation to an employee to permit her to care for a disabled child?
In a case decided earlier this month (Magnus v. St. Mark United Methodist Church), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ADA does not require employers to provide reasonable accommodations to non-disabled workers.
However, that does not mean that employers have carte blanche to discriminate against employees who must care for disabled loved ones. Here are a couple of other lessons from the Seventh Circuit:
Courts analyzing anti-discrimination statutes such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act mandate that employers educate employees about discrimination in the workplace and provide a way for them to complain. Then, once made aware of discrimination in the workplace, the employer must take steps that are reasonably designed to end the discrimination. That could mean anything from a verbal warning up to termination of employment. That decision is up to the employer.
In Phila. Housing Authority v. AFSCME, after investigating a complaint of sexual harassment, a unionized employer with a zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment fired the alleged harasser. The union subsequently filed a grievance that eventually led to arbitration, at which time the arbitrator deemed the alleged harasser’s behavior to be “lewd, lascivious and extraordinarily perverse.” Notwithstanding, the arbitrator concluded that a verbal warning would have sufficed, rather than termination, and ordered the alleged harasser reinstated and made whole.
On appeal, the PA Supreme Court blasted the arbitrator’s decision, while emphasizing the public policy against unlawful harassment in the workplace.
Got a jury trial coming up? Concerned about jurors using social media to discuss the case or conduct independent research during trial? As you may recall from this blog post, if you are counting on the court to independently instruct jurors not to get their Twitter on, well, don’t hold your breath.
Instead, consider including this new two-page model jury instruction addressing juror use of social media during trial. You’ll note that jurors are instructed twice about social-media use. According to this official press release, the new rules emphasize that a single instruction to refrain from using social media to discuss/research the trial is not enough:
The judges recommended that jurors frequently be reminded about the prohibition on social media before the trial, at the close of a case, at the end of each day before jurors return home, and other times, as appropriate. Jurors should be told why refraining from use of social media promotes a fair trial. Finally, jurors should know the consequences of violations during trial, such as mistrial and wasted time. Those recommendations are now part of the guidelines.
I’m back, jack.
And I have some hella-tough shoes to fill, following Janette Levey Frisch‘s killer two-part guest-blogger series on the interplay between the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. You can find Part One here and Part Two here.
So, we all know by now that if a disabled employee requests that his employer afford him a reasonable accommodation to allow the employee to perform the essential functions of his position, the employer must do so (assuming a reasonable accommodation exists). That’s ADA 101.
Today, Janette Levey Frisch is back as guest blogger to wrap up her two-part series on the interplay between the between the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act. (You can read Part One here).
Janette is In-House Counsel at Joule, Inc. where she provides comprehensive legal representation and support to a staffing company with five subsidiaries throughout the East Coast. You can connect with Janette on Twitter here and on LinkedIn here.
Click through to read more about how the FMLA and ADA may cross paths in your workplace….
(And if this awesome two-part series inspires you to want to guest blog at The Employer Handbook? Email me.)
* * *
Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s Janette Levey Frisch. Janette is In-House Counsel at Joule, Inc. where she provides comprehensive legal representation and support to a staffing company with five subsidiaries throughout the East Coast. You can connect with Janette on Twitter here and on LinkedIn here.
Part one of Janette’s post on the interplay between the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act, an HR-compliance must-read, follows after the jump…
(Want to guest blog at The Employer Handbook? Email me.)
* * *
We interrupt this labor & employment law blog for an important announcement…
It’s got a nice ring to it…
[If you listen carefully, you can actually hear the sound of page-hits and prurient reader interest cascading at The Employer Handbook. It’s got a little funky Salt n’ Pepa beat to it…]
Last May, I slobbered over blogged here about a former Indianapolis Colts’ cheerleader who sued the team claiming that the Colts discriminated against her on the basis of her race (Asian) and national origin (Indonesian).
Earlier this week, the court ruled on the Colts’ motion to dispose of the case. While I think we can all agree that this sort of hard-hitting blog fodder is better suited for a Monday post, I’m going to blog the heck out of the Court’s decision…after the jump. (It’s a long post, but it’s soooooo worth it).
* * *
The Employer Handbook Blog