One employer appears to have screwed up royally. Click through to find out how.
Three nights ago…
Eric: How many bags of Halloween candy do you think we need this year?
Wife: Our neighbors said last year they had ten.
My Facebook and Twitter feeds were blowing up yesterday with links to articles at NYTimes.com, Huffington Post, and Jezebel about how the sandwich chain, Jimmy John’s, supposedly makes its sandwich makers and delivery drivers sign these non-competition agreements. These agreements purport to preclude employees from working for certain nearby competitors for two years after their employment with Jimmy John’s ends.
Now, I know what you’re thinking…
That Meyer has the coolest Facebook and Twitter feeds evah! How can I get with him? (Well, here’s how you can get with me next month, but I digress).
I’m not going to comment specifically on Jimmy John’s and its purported practice other than to say that I work in Philadelphia and it would be sacrilege to let a “sub sandwich” pass between these lips. But, after the jump, I do have a few general pointers from employers about restrictive covenants…
* * *
Coming up during this term, the Supreme Court will decide seven cases relating to HR compliance. To put this into proper perspective, if you were to award a point for every forthcoming Supreme Court decision, that would be seven more points than the entire New York Giants team scored against the Philadelphia Eagles on Sunday night.
[Yep, still basking in the glow].
Anyway, for more on these important cases affecting your workplace, Philip Miles has you covered here at Lawffice Space.
But, hey, what do you have to lose by filing the lawsuit anyway, right? I mean, it can’t end up worse than the New York Giants on Sunday Night Football.
(Oh yeah, I went there).
More after the jump…
Across the country, many states and localities have enacted ban-the-box legislation. In a nutshell, ban the box means that employers cannot inquire about an applicant’s criminal history until after the first job interview.
For example, Philadelphia has ban the box. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania does not.
Still, Pennsylvania does have the Criminal History Record Information Act. But, indeed, a Pennsylvania federal court ruled on Wednesday that the Act and ban the box are two separate things:
I’m just saying, what if you could attend an event — a free event, with breakfast — and you get to hear me speak for an hour and fifteen about social media in the workplace and other hot workplace issues, and then grill me during a Q&A?
That would suck, right? Because, apart from the breakfast, who wants to hear me speak for an hour and fifteen minutes?
Remember that Americans with Disabilities Act case involving Walgreens and the $1.39 bag of chips. In that one, the store appeared to really step in it by firing a diabetic who ate a bag of chips from the store without paying for it. The employee claimed that she needed the chips for her diabetes. The store defended its actions by arguing that the employee violated its no-grazing policy. $180,000 later, that case settled.
I don’t know how much the chicken poppers sell for at Wal-Mart. And the case I read over the weekend involving the company’s no-grazing policy didn’t settle either…
Click for more…