Remember The Office episode where Jim puts Dwight’s stapler in Jello? Well, apparently workers taking revenge on each other happens in real life too.
Allowing employees to use their own personal electronic devices for doing work presents compliance concerns. From the human resources compliance perspective, employers’ concern is often focused on non-exempt employees being paid legally for working off the clock by responding to emails, texts, and phone calls after hours. Other compliance concerns include performance management, discrimination, harassment, privacy, and safety.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel continues to drive a stake into those radical rule changes handed down over the past ten years with a new memo outlining how rules will be interpreted as permissible or impermissible under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Although employers are cautioned to tread social media lightly, it can be a useful tool to confirm an injury or illness when an employee is claiming disability and/or FMLA.
The Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published three opinion letters earlier this month providing employers guidance on how to treat travel time, break time, and whether lump-sum payments can be garnished and to what extent.
In December, Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which was grudgingly signed into law by President Trump on December 22, 2017. Upon passage a number of companies such as AT&T, Apple, Southwest Airlines, and Fifth Third Bank announced bonuses to be paid to employees ranging from $1,000 to $2,500. Fifth Third Bank also increased its minimum wage to $15 per hour, while Wal-Mart hiked its minimum wage to $11 per hour.
In one of the most anticipated employment and labor law cases, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of arbitration class action waivers earlier this week (Epic Systems Corp. v Lewis 5/21/2018).
A question that has been pending for many years has been whether applicants, and not just employees, can avail themselves to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) disparate impact provisions.
You found an applicant for your open position, extended an offer, and received the results of the background verification. The report has items listed under the criminal or driving checks that you don’t like, so you decide to rescind the offer. That’s no problem because of the background check, right? Actually, that is very wrong and can put your company at risk for a lawsuit.
Last week California’s Supreme Court struck out, on its own direction, redefining what an independent contractor is in that state (Dynamex v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County). You might be wondering “what is so new about that?” After all, California typically finds a way to go out on its own perhaps thinking the rest of the country should or will follow them eventually.
At times overtime is required in order to meet customer demand. An HR issue can arise when an employee presents a doctor’s note stating that the employee can only work eight hours per day and no overtime. Since ADA or FMLA may apply, how does the employer respond to this situation?
Last week was a fairly newsworthy week at the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP). For federal contractors who long had to deal with the secrecy and “gotcha” attitude of the prior administration, the new administration is a sigh of relief.
Calculating time worked for non-exempt employees who travel for their job is a challenge for many employers. On April 12, the U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division issued an opinion letter that tackles this question.
Since 2012, McDonald’s Corporation and the NLRB have been embroiled in the question of what joint employment is. The question is over whether the McDonald’s Corporation as a franchisor could be held responsible for allegedly wrongful employment practices of its franchisees.
Last week the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced the rollout of a “new” pilot program called the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program. This program offers employers a process to self-report wage and hour violations with the DOL to clear them up without being exposed to as many potential damages and monetary penalties.
Following the leads of the U.S. 2nd Circuit and 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (which includes Michigan) continues the expansion of the definition of “sex” under Title VII and recognizes that discrimination on the basis of transgender and transitioning status or gender identity is discrimination on the basis of sex.
In a case decided Monday by the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, the full court in an en banc hearing definitively decided that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 covers sexual orientation as a protected class. What makes this case extremely interesting is that the EEOC and U.S. Department of Justice both filed briefs taking diametrically opposing positions.
Most federal gender pay discrimination cases are brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The other applicable law that was intended to address pay discrimination, the federal Equal Pay Act (EPA), was enacted before Title VII and was more narrow-focused.
Victor Park West
19575 Victor Parkway, Suite 100
Livonia, MI 48152