Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s Holly DePalma. Holly is Director, HR Services at MidAtlantic Employers’ Association, a single source for HR services, delivering responsive, practical solutions to its members.
(Want to guest blog on an employment-law topic at The Employer Handbook? Email me).
* * *
There’s a fine line between genius and insanity.
Sex sells. So, when 22 female cocktail servers at an Atlantic City casino pursued claims of discrimination based on their appearance, it came as little shock to me that the judge wasn’t buying.
Last month, a New Jersey state court dismissed a lawsuit against the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa, brought by cocktail waitresses known as the “Borgata Babes,” who claimed that they were victims of gender and weight discrimination.
Jennifer Bogdan, writing here for the Press of Atlantic City, notes that, upon hire, Borgata told its servers that they must appear “physically fit” with their weight proportionate to their height and, ultimately, banned the servers from gaining more than 7 percent of their body weight. Supposedly, the women were subject to periodic weight checks and suspension for failing to meet the weight requirements, with exceptions made for medical conditions and pregnancy.
Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s my colleague, Kristen Repyneck. Kristen is an associate at Dilworth Paxson LLP where she represents clients seeking non-immigrant and immigrant visas through family, employment, and investment, including investment in USCIS certified regional centers under the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Visa Program.
(Want to guest blog at The Employer Handbook? Email me).
* * *
As many of you know, I am a HUGE Boston Bruins fan. But, right now, I have little love for former Bruins winger Tyler Seguin.
You see, Seguin was a highly touted 2011 draft pick who did a disappearing act in the playoffs this year. Amidst reports that his off-ice behavior was interfering with his on-ice performance, the Bruins traded the 21-year-old Seguin to the Dallas Stars on July 4.
The media scrutiny caused Seguin’s mom to come to his defense. (I’m sure that won’t ignite the crowds at all during road games). But just as that story began to lose steam, Seguin’s Twitter account published this tweet:
According to this recent survey from CareerBuilder.com, the number of hiring managers who are reporting that a job candidate’s social media indiscretions have cost them a position is up nearly 10%, while the overall use social media to vet candidates continues to grow.
Those surveyed, reported finding a variety of concerning content. Top mentions ranged from evidence of inappropriate behavior to information that contradicted their listed qualifications:
- 50% – Candidate posted provocative/inappropriate photos/info
This week, I am on vacation. The Supreme Court didn’t get my memo. Fine. But, I’m not putting down my beer to write this post. So, you get a one-handed rundown of the two employment-law decisions the court issued yesterday.
Pardon my typos after the jump…
* * *
Who would’ve guessed that, in June 2013, we’d have 11 states with social media privacy laws. I mean what are the odds? That’d be like Kanye West and Kim Kardashian deciding to name their baby daughter ‘North West’.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to check why my Twitter is blowing up.
Oh, good God!
There’s not a whole lot that we have in common. I’m more erudite (you know, the blog thing), better looking, and more arrogant confident.
Given our differences, what I’m about to say may come as a surprise: when I was a associate attorney, I discussed salaries with other associates.
(I’ll pause as the shock dissipates).
Allow me to be serious for a moment…
Moment’s passed, eh? Ok. Let me bring it back…
Last week, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled (here) that discharging a female employee because she is lactating or expressing breast milk is sex discrimination and, therefore, violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII).
The Employer Handbook Blog