Its seems likes ages ago that I blogged about a Seventh Circuit decision, where the appellate court held that an employment-arbitration agreement with a class-action waiver violates the National Labor Relations Act.
Uh, Eric, it was Tuesday.
***stabs inner voice with a Q-Tip***
That’s right folks. It’s time for another edition of “Fact or Fiction” a/k/a “Quick Answers to Quick Questions” a/k/a QATQQ f/k/a “I don’t feel like writing a long blog post.”
There are times when an employee claims that his working conditions have become so intolerable — a really, really bad hostile work environment, that he is forced to resign. That’s a claim of constructive discharge. If that employee later wishes to bring a claim against his former employer, he must do so within a certain period of time.
Does the statute of limitations on a constructive-discharge claim begin to run from the date of the last discriminatory act? Or the date of the resignation?
Anyone else need a day off from being bombarded with lawyers talking about the Department of Labor’s new overtime rules?
I feel ya!
Because, I’m pretty sure that I’ll get my employment-lawyer-blogger card revoked if I don’t offer a self-deprecating blog post about age discrimination on my 40th birthday. But, feel free to raise my spirits by pledging a pair of tickets to the Philly stop of the Guns N’ Roses reunion tour.
Oh, God! I really am old!
He got the hook, all right. Or, you could say that his position was sliced. Boo-yah! I mean, Baba Booey!
Hey, I’ll be here all week.
Imagine arriving at work in the morning to the red light indicator on your desk phone. So, you pick up the handset, punch in a few numbers, and are greeted with a voicemail from your President. She’d like you to ask the employment lawyer whether it’s “legal” to pose an ultimatum to two company managers: Stop cohabitating with each other’s spouse, or find another job.
Could something like that really happen? Of course, it could. Because, employment law.
Or maybe…
On Monday, one of my favorite HR bloggers, Suzanne Lucas a/k/a The Evil HR Lady, addressed (here) a reader question about whether a company can legally prohibit an employee from seeking other employment while on leave covered under the Family and Medical Leave Act.
As part of her post, Her Evilness asked for others to weigh in on the subject. ABA Journal Blawg 100 Hall of Famer, Jon Hyman, answered the call on his blog post yesterday. Jon concluded that the legal answer depends upon the scope of the policy.
Well, at least it was a phone interview.
Hey, one thing you guys know about me is that I’m all about the low hanging fruit and the cheap laugh. So, when I see that CareerBuilder has published it’s 2016 version of “Employers Share Strangest Interview Mishaps and Biggest Body Language Mistakes,” I’m bout it, bout it.
(Sorry, FMLA compliance nerds, you’ll have to wait for another post).
I’ve blogged (here) that grilling a medical marijuana user about her disability, just before firing the employee, could give rise to a viable disability-discrimination claim. In other words, where the disability (as opposed to the medical marijuana use) motivates the employment action, that’s discrimination.
I’ve blogged before (here) that the Americans with Disabilities Act does not protect illegal drug use by employees. So, if the illegal drug use, and not the disability, motivates a company to fire an employee, that’s perfectly legal.
The Employer Handbook Blog