Search
The Employer Handbook BlogThat’s What They Said: “Justice Scalia’s impact on HR and employment law”
I really need to create a new meme. Continue reading
Articles Posted in That’s what he/she/they said…
Apparently, you can curse your boss out and still keep your job
What with me gabbing on about firefighters afraid of fighting fires, butt grabs, and some Delaware lawyer starving himself over social media, I missed this National Labor Relations Board decision, in which the Board basically held that, as long as you don’t go too far and pull a Latrell Sprewell, you can curse out your boss with impunity.
Literally, you can call your boss a “f*%king crook,” an “a$$hole,” and “stupid” on a Friday, and still have a job to come back to on Monday.
God bless America.
That’s what she said: How to navigate the pitfalls of the FCRA
When the Fair Credit Reporting Act comes a knock knock knockin’ on HR’s door, who among you, will answer the call?
Fear not, kids. Cinch on your big boy/girl underpants! My colleague, Stacey Schor, in this post, has outlined a recent federal court decision that provides valuable guidance on how employers can comply with the strict requirements of FCRA, so that your hiring decisions are FCRA-bulletproofed.
This one goes out to all out FCRA freaks fans. Holler if you hear me!
That’s what they said: Social media and the workplace and the lawsuits
One social media-related post in October. One may be good enough for the Red Sox — eat it, Detroit — not here.
So, with a little help from my friends, I’ve got three stories on the the impact that the technology in the workplace has on litigation proceedings.
Over at the Technology & Marketing Law Blog, Venkat Balasubramani writes here about a recent decision in which a court found that a passenger’s social media rant against and airline employee may not have been defamation, but it was enough to create a claim of “false light.”
That’s what they said: Facebook “Like” under the First Amendment, same-sex marriage benefits, plus a carnival
Now, where did I put the mustard for my deep fried Red Bull battered Twinkie dog? (Like I would ever use ketchup for that?!?)
While I search for the spicy brown, after the jump, I’ll get you caught up on the latest employment-law news…
* * *
That’s what they said: Lotsa NLRB news, and an employment-law carnival
So much labor-and-employment-law news this week, I’ll do what I can to cram it into a single post. Here goes…
From Seth Borden at Labor Relations Today comes this news about the Senate agreeing to — gasp — seat a full five-member National Labor Relations Board. How could this happen? Something about a nuclear option and compromising photos..
Staying with the labor theme, Joel Barras at Employment Law Watch reports here about a recent advice memorandum from the NLRB’s General Counsel in which the GC concludes that employers must bargain with their unions before implementing new social media policies. No shock there.
Supreme Court DOMA ruling “In Plain English”; impact on employers
Want an explanation of yesterday Supreme Court decision regarding challenges to California’s ban on same-sex marriage and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, check out Amy Howe’s analysis “In Plain English” at SCOTUSblog.com.
And for more on yesterday’s decision and the impact it may have on your business, check out:
- Lyle Denniston’s recap at SCOTUSblog.com
- Danielle Kurtzleben’s report on the impact DOMA may have on your workplace
- “DOMA Ruling Means Changes Loom for Employers” from Lauren Weber at WSJ.com
- “Post-DOMA, Employers Face HR Challenges” from Shannon Green at Corporate Counsel
- “Now What? Employer Benefits Obligations Post-DOMA” from Stephen Miller, CEBS at SHRM.org
That’s what he said: SCOTUS hears argument on who is a “supervisor”
Maetta Vance, the only African-American working in her department at Ball State University, claimed that she was subjected to both race discrimination and retaliation. Vance later sued and lost because she could not establish employer liability, which, in turn, depended on whether the alleged harassment was perpetrated by supervisors or coworkers.
Employers have an affirmative defense when the supervisor harassment does not result in a tangible employment action. If, however, the harassing supervisor fires, suspends, or takes some other similar action against the victim, it’s check mate.
In instances of co-worker harassment, where tangible employment actions wouldn’t be at issue (because the harassing co-worker wouldn’t have that power), to prevail on a discrimination claim, the plaintiff must show, among other things, that the employer has “been negligent either in discovering or remedying the harassment.”
That’s what he said: Attorney Tips for Seeking Social Media Discovery
I’m gearing up to host the Employment Law Blog Carnival on Wednesday, so I’m mailing it in today with a quick shout out to Venkat Balasubramani posting over at Eric Goldman’s Technology and Marketing Law Blog.
Admittedly, I have fallen behind on updating you, my loyal readers, on the world of social media and discovery. Mostly, because the most recent jurisprudence has been from outside of the Pennsylvania and everything pales in comparison to this great Commonwealth. Except, most recently, for the Philadelphia Eagles.
Speaking of which, have you heard this one?
That’s what they said: “Naked ambition” and a “voyeur boss”? (And more…)
As evidenced by the nature of this blog post and the picture on the right, it’s best not to leave me in the office alone, unsupervised, with an iPhone, and App Store credits, as I punch this out at 10:52 at night on a Thursday. (And yet, somehow, the Wall Street Journal deems me quotable).
Rest assured, everything I do, I do it for you. And, best of all, it’s all employment-law related. Love my job!
(My wife has to be cool with me using our wedding song for this blog post, right? Love ya, baby! “Take me as I am….”)