A bill that would have made it illegal for New Jersey companies to refuse to hire a job candidate because of his/her employment status is dead for now. Find out why after the jump...
Last week, the National Labor Relations Board issued this memorandum in which it has instructed regional offices to encourage employees to file complaints with the United States Department of Labor if the the regional NLRB office "believes that an employer may have violated a substantive or anti-retaliation provision of [OSHA] or the FLSA."
Remember that the National Labor Relations Act covers more than just unionized employers and workplace. For example, many of the social media cases involving the NLRB that you may have read about actually involve non-union workplaces. So, if you haven't gotten the message already, this NLRB initiative is another wake-up call to get your house in order.
Otherwise, you may have multiple federal agencies up in your business.
I was reading this recent CareerBuilder survey, which reports that 58% of employers have caught a lie on a resumé. (Most popular lie: skills embellishment).
As, CareerBuilder is apt to do, the survey contained a section of some of the most outlandish lies ever caught on a resumé.
Some that made that list include: Applicant included job experience that was actually his father's. Meh. Applicant claimed to have 25 years of experience at age 32. Getting warmer.
Then I scanned down and saw this doozie: Applicant applied to a position with a company who had just terminated him. He listed the company under previous employment and indicated on his resume that he had quit.
What's the best lie you've ever caught on a resumé? And how did you catch it? Let me know in the comments below.
Come January 1, most NJ employers will no longer be able to ask about an applicant's criminal record during the initial employment application process.
Ban the box will be b-b-b-b-banned in the Garden State!
More on the new law after the jump...
How do you think that worked out? (I've got a pretty good guess too).
After the jump, let's see if we're right.
When the new amendments to the the Americans with Disabilities Act took effect in 2009, the law became more employee-friendly by expanding the definition of what constitutes a disability.
That said, the law doesn't (yet) require an employer to have a sixth sense about whether a disabled employee requires a reasonable accommodation.
Generally, an employee has to ask for it. Or, as we find out after the jump, an ADA failure-to-accommodate lawsuit is pretty much doomed.
Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.
But, if you send FMLA paperwork to an employee by first class mail, then you're asking for trouble.
I'll show you why after the jump...
Well, it was friendly-ish in a cutthroat sorta way. At least, that's what the look on his tear-stained face suggested to me when I mouthed "Uno," shimmied, and spiked my final card to win my fourth game in a row.
Now, some would say that I took it a bit too far when I collected his tears, and then painted them on my face to mock his crying.
But those people are soft.
In Uno, I talk the talk and walk the walk.
The same could be said for employment-law webinars. And it's not that I view "Hair, Holidays and Hijabs: Religious Discrimination in the Workplace," a webinar that I am co-presenting for BNA today at 2:00 PM EDT, as a competition.
But, I'm going to really need to raise my game today carry my weight with my co-presenter.
Oh you didn't know? I have the honor and privilege of co-presenting on religious discrimination with P. David Lopez, EEOC General Counsel.
Not to worry though; I have a few aces up my sleeve -- provided that I remember to wear sleeves, which has been a struggle recently.
But seriously, you could a lot worse than David and me for 90 minutes on a really hot workplace issue like religious discrimination and accommodations. There is still time to register (here).
And if you can't make it, and you want a copy of our PowerPoint, just email me and I'll send it to you after the webinar.
Provided that you can beat me in a game of Uno.
(Don't embarrass yourself, I'll send you the PowerPoint anyway...)
On the clock or off, when employees do dumb stuff on Facebook, it could cost them their jobs. And, apparently, their discrimination claims against their former employer too.
Yep, another employee screwed up online. Go figure.
More on that after the jump...
Peep this ADA failure-to-accommodate case. Plaintiff is disabled and requests light duty. However, the evidence presented showed that there were no light duty positions available and the plaintiff presented no evidence to the contrary.
In denying the plaintiff's ADA claim, the court underscored that it's the plaintiff's burden to show that a requested reasonable accommodation exists and is available. Otherwise, my friends, if it's not available, then it's not reasonable.
The answer to today's QATQQ is fiction.
Plus, it may violate the Americans with Disabilities Act too.
How one company's alleged blunder turned into an ADA lawsuit and a blog post at TheEmployerHandbook.com...after the jump...