A little over three years ago, I blogged here about the Senate and House each introducing the Family and Medical Insurance Leave Act. (FAMILY Act). The FAMILY Act, which never made it out of Congress to President Obama, would have created a national paid family and medical leave program for all workers, male and female.
Well, guess what’s back?
Seems appropriate to broach this trench-HR conundrum on a hump day, amirite?
(Don’t worry. I’ll be here all week).
.jpg "By Editor182 [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons")
”
Picture a nerdier version of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, where persuasive legal briefs and sharp oral advocacy are like rear naked chokes and “ground and pound.”
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? (Mute your computer at 1:12 and 1:36)
I’ll open this post with a haiku. Because, I feel like we could all use a haiku.
President-Elect
For HR, what will he do?
Not a stinkin’ clue!
Last night, while you we sleeping in your comfy beds — me, on a pile of money, blogging power and, yes, ego — a Texas federal judge entered an injunction against the final “blacklisting” rules and guidance of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council.
On average, organizations gave mothers 41 paid days of maternity leave, compared with 22 paid days of paternity leave for fathers. That statistic comes from 2016 Paid Leave in the Workplace, a survey recently conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management.
Does this disparity demonstrate discrimination against men?
Is it just me, or do you guys also quote Varsity Blues whenever you hear the Foo Fighters sing My Hero?
Just for today, head on over to LinkedIn, and check out my post about how strict application of your dress code could result in a nasty sex discrimination claim.
(And a little teaser for Monday — I’ll explain why the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision may trump Title VII and allow some employers to discriminate).
The Employer Handbook Blog