Remember Natalie Munroe? Let me see if I can refresh your recollection.
She’s a blogger. She’s a teacher. That’s right, smarties. She’s the blogging teacher who got suspended after her school learned that he had written on her personal blog that she wished she could leave the following comments for students so that parents could gain further insight into how their children were performing in school:
- “Am concerned that your kid is going to come in one day and open fire on the school. (Wish I was kidding.)”
- Rude, beligerent, argumentative fuck.”
- Utterly loathsome in all imaginable ways.”
- I called out sick a couple of days just to avoid your son.”
- There’s no other way to say this: I hate your kid.”
The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), a federal law, entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take up to twelve workweeks of unpaid, job-protected leave in a 12-month period for:
- the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within one year of birth;
- the placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within one year of placement;
- to care for the employee’s spouse, child, or parent who has a serious health condition; and
- a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job.
Earlier this month, Senator John Tester (MT-D) introduced a bill that would amend the FMLA to provide leave because of the death of a son or daughter.
Details on this bill and what it would mean for employers after the jump…
I received a comment to yesterday’s post about 29 questions you should never ask a candidate in a job interview.
“Hey, Eric. Great list. I once had an employment lawyer tell me that you can ask any question — you just can’t make an employment decision based on the answers. Can you blog about that distinction? Asking versus action? I would love to get your thoughts on that!”
Ask and ye shall receive. Or is it, ye shall receive, yo? (If you don’t read Laurie’s blog, that last sentence flew right over your head).
Either way, I’ll share my thoughts after the jump…
* * *
HBO Go may just be the best app ever.
Over the past two weeks, I’ve gotten current on Entourage and Game of Thrones, and begun watching Eastbound and Down. Watching characters like Ari Gold, Kenny Powers and Tyrion Lannister got me thinking. If these guys were in HR, what kind of questions would they ask potential hires in a job interview?
***You know, this all sounded so much better in my head.***
After the jump, I have 29 questions you should never ask a candidate in a job interview.
Look, I’m not one to toot my own horn…
And, God knows, I never like to plug my own work.
But, seriously folks, I would be remiss if I did not mention (again) that the Proactive Employer Podcast, sponsored by Thomas Econometrics, is presenting a special two-part round table discussion where experts answer all of your HR and social media questions. They’ve lined up an all-star panel of labor and employment lawyers, bloggers and social media adopters who will be sharing their expertise on various aspects of social media and human resources.
Welcome back to “Fact or Fiction” a/k/a “Quick Answers to Quick Questions” a/k/a QATQQ f/k/a “I don’t feel like writing a long blog post”.
So, is a miniature horse a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act? Maybe.
The Employment Law Blog Carnival has finally rolled into town.
What is a blog carnival? It is a collection of links on a particular topic — here, employment law — that bloggers have submitted to me, which I then arrange around a particular theme.
For this edition of the Carnival, it’s DJ-ESkeelz on the one and two, with a music-themed employment-law blog carnival. I’ve got 13 hot joints (read: 13 links to employment-law articles from some of the blogosphere’s best…)
Folks, you are in for a treat today.
Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s Janette Levey Frisch. Janette is In-House Counsel at Joule, Inc. where she provides comprehensive legal representation and support to a staffing company with five subsidiaries throughout the East Coast. You can connect with Janette on Twitter here and on LinkedIn here.
And if you want to read a great piece about the interplay between the Family and Medical Leave Act and the New Jersey Family Leave Act, then hit the jump…
Philadelphia Police Department has enacted a social media policy. You can view it here.
A couple of noteworthy points about this policy:
- It recognizes that social media plays an important “business” role within the Department. The Department gets it by endorsing the “secure use of social media to enhance communication, collaboration, and information exchange; streamline processes; and foster productivity.”
- Employees may not use City property to engage in personal social networking activities. That includes cellphones, laptops and other portable devices that may be used outside of the office. In fact, employees may not even use social media on their own electronic devices while on duty.
- The policy underscores that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when engaging in social networking online. As such, the content of social networking websites may be obtained for use in criminal trials, civil proceedings, and departmental investigations.
- Employees must get prior consent before engaging in Department-authorized use of social media. This is defined as the employment of such instruments for the specific purpose of assisting the department and its personnel in community outreach, problem-solving, investigation, crime prevention, and other department-related objectives. The PPD is unionized and, as you know from reading this blog, the National Labor Relations Board has taken an aggressive approach against employers who enact policies that may chill union-related speech. On its face, this rule appears to be designed as a safety measure, rather than a means to quell discussion about terms and conditions of employment. Plus, the Fraternal Order of Police, as public sector employees, would not be covered under the NLRA. Still, the policy lacks any explicit mention of the right to engage in protected-speech.