The Employer Handbook Blog

Doggone-it. Must employers give leave to employees with hurt pets?

October 13, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Thumbnail image for sleepingdog.jpeg Worst. Pun. Ever.

In some states, employees who become victims of domestic violence, or whose family members are victims of domestic violence, are entitled to take a short unpaid leave from work. In one state, companies need to be aware of possible legislation that would require them to afford time off to employees whose pets are victims of violence or threats of violence.

Find out which state — you have a 1 in 50 chance — after the jump…

* * *

What’s new on the interwebs in HR and employment law?

October 12, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

I hope you enjoyed yesterday’s Simpsons post. I had a blast writing it but, damn, it sapped the life out of me. So, after the jump, I’m sending you out into the blogosphere for your daily dose of employment law and HR news…

* * *

Can Homer Simpson sue Mr. Burns for disability bias, and win?

October 11, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

In yesterday’s post, we looked at whether a morbidly-obese employee is protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Today, let’s apply yesterday’s discussion to a “real-world” example. Is Homer Simpson disabled? And is the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant legally obligated to offer him a reasonable accommodation? The answers after the jump…

* * *

Is morbid obesity a disability under federal employment law?

October 10, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Recently, the EEOC sued a Texas company, alleging that the company engaged in disability discrimination, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, when it fired a 680-pound worker because he was morbidly obese.

Is that right? Can being overweight be considered a “disability” under federal law? And, if so, what can companies do to find themselves staring down the barrel of loaded ADA lawsuit? I’ll answer these questions after the jump.

* * *

A little ambiguity creates a BIG retaliation headache for employers

October 7, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Retaliation claims have become the leading cause of action for employees. In fiscal year 2010, retaliation charges filed with the EEOC nationwide accounted for 36.3% of all filings, at 36,258. There are three essential elements of a retaliation claim:

Employee Protected Activity – opposition to discrimination or participation in the statutory complaint process;

Employer Adverse Action – any adverse treatment (beyond a petty slight or a trivial annoyance) that is based on a retaliatory motive and is reasonably likely to deter protected activity; and

Causal Connection – between the protected activity and the adverse action.

What makes retaliation claims so common? Well, it’s not so much because they are are easy for employees to prove. In my opinion, it’s because retaliation claims are tough for employers to disprove prior to trial.

Case in point after the jump…

* * *

Get answers to your social media and hiring questions

October 6, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Maybe it’s that good feeling I still have after eating some hella-good spicy fried chicken at Bolton’s Spicy Chicken & Fish in Nashville, TN last night.

Oh no, wait, that’s heartburn.

In any event, I’m feeling generous. I feel like giving back some of the love. Later today, I will be speaking at the Advanced Employment Issues Symposium in Nashville, TN, where I will be presenting Using Social Media To Make Hiring and Firing Decisions: What’s Legal? What’s Not?. If you have social-media hiring-related questions that you would for like for me to answer, fire away! You just need to do two things for me.

NLRB puts the temporary kibosh on its mandatory union-rights poster

October 6, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

The National Labor Relations Board announced yesterday afternoon that it has pushed back its deadline for covered employers to post this notice, advising employees how to form a union, among other things.

More details, including the new deadline, after the jump…

* * *

Employee drug testing and bashful bladders; it’s a wicked pissah!

October 5, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Your business drug tests job applicants as a condition of employment. What would happen if a male applicant refused to take a urine test because he claimed that he had paruresis, otherwise known as “shy bladder syndrome” or “bashful bladder syndrome”? Would you have to accommodate the applicant with a different type of drug test? Or could you just refuse to hire the applicant?

The EEOC recently addressed this topic and I have the answer — along with some self-deprecation — after the jump…

* * *

Ever wondered what professional athletes are allowed to tweet?

October 4, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

The other day, I came across this great article on ESPN.com, which outlines all of the social-media policies currently in effect for several sports leagues worldwide. What struck me most is that several organizations, including the NCAA, have no social-media policies for their athletes. And at the other end of the spectrum, the Ultimate Fighting Championship actually rewards its athletes based on number of Twitter followers.

This further supports a point that I like to hammer (e.g., here and here): ultimately, for any business, a social-media policy is never a “one-size-fits-all.” Instead, the social-media policy — and all companies should have one — must be tailor-fit to the objectives and goals of the company.

For additional insight into drafting social media policies, I suggest Think Before You Click: Strategies for Managing Social Media in the Workplace.

Pyrrhic Victory: Judge ok’s firing for Facebook post, but…

October 3, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Last week, a National Labor Relations Board Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ruled, for the first time, that an employer could legally fire an employee based on Facebook activity. In Karl Knauz Motors, Inc. d/b/a Knauz BMW and Robert Becker, the ALJ okayed a BMW dealership firing an employee who posted pictures (accompanied by some snarky comments) about a neighboring Land Rover dealership.

So what’s up with the title of this blog post? And why should employers be concerned with this decision? Find out after the jump…

* * *