Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment

Fired for a mouth full of coffee? That’s a new one. Or, maybe, age discrimination.

October 13, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

WWE great The Undertaker is 50 years old. He’s an eight-time Heavyweight Champion. But, his greatest feat is ~~never missing one of my posts~~ his streak of 21 consecutive wins at Wrestlemania. But then, at Wrestlemania XXX, the streak ended.

Do you think that The Undertaker’s age motivated the WWE’s decision to script this loss — yes, sorry, it’s scripted? In that context, the notion of age discrimination seems silly. But, what about at work?

Where a 20-year employee with an exemplary record is suddenly fired…

Something wrong with a little bump n’ grind. Sexual harassment, perhaps.

October 12, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

Something else you may not know about me.

On Saturday evenings, I crash Bar Mitzvahs and hustle blackjack. And then I’m like…

But then, on Sunday, it’s back the Bloggerdome for a new post. For this one, let’s talk about ~~R. Kelly~~ a recent Fourth Circuit decision in which the appellate court recognized that a single incident — one touch — may create a hostile work environment.

ADA and accommodating peanut allergies at work

October 8, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

Well, damn.

To those who you who receive my blog posts via email, I’m sorry. Yesterday, we had some technical difficulties and my card check post didn’t make it into your inbox. I realize that for some of you — ok, all of you — my blog posts are an icy-cold bottle of beer in the arid desert that is your mid-week slog. Again, I’m sorry. I’ll ~~release the wrongdoers from the shackles in my basement~~ do better.

But just to be safe, as a Versace belt to the Hermes suspenders, you may want to like The Employer Handbook on Facebook. Every post is shared there.

Now, back to employment law and what-not.

A job duty performed 5% of the time is probably not ADA-essential, you guys

October 6, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

“Smithers, refill my lime rickey. And find me a dunce cap. Post haste.”

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires employers to provide a reasonable accommodation, upon request, to an individual with a disability to enable that person to perform the essential functions of the job. Oftentimes, the questions arises: What are the essential functions of the job?

Can you legally fire an employee for extreme gas?

October 5, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

My readers are the best!

On Friday, I received two emails within 15 minutes of one another, encouraging me to blog about this story. Kenneth Hilario at the Philadelphia Business Journal writes about an employee of an NJ company who is suing her employer. What makes this story special? The company allegedly fired the spouse’s husband, the company’s controller, because of his “extreme gas and uncontrollable diarrhea.”

Just because I walk away when you slap my butt, doesn’t mean I like it.

October 2, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

Butt slaps are rarely appropriate. Not in the courtroom. Not in the workplace. Even Buttslaps, LLC in Butte, Montana frowns on butt slaps at work.

(I totally made that last part up. Don’t Google it).

Where am I going with this? ~~Hell~~ When an employee sues for sexual harassment, he or she must prove several elements. One of those elements is that the employee was offended by sexual conduct directed at them.

Enforce your social media policies evenly. Otherwise, it’s bloggy-blog time.

September 30, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

An employee who was allegedly fired for violating a company’s social media policy is going to have his day in court. And on this blog.

EEOC Commissioner Feldblum responds to my post about transgender discrimination

September 29, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

You’re right, Commissioner Feldblum. Social media is awesome!

Last Friday, I posted here about a recent federal-court decision addressing the sex discrimination claims of a transgender employee. What drew my attention to the case was this Facebook status update from EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum, in which she touted the court’s decision as further support for the EEOC’s position that transgender discrimination is sex discrimination under Title VII. In my Friday post, I concluded that, while the court did allow the plaintiff’s sex discrimination claims to proceed to trial, it wasn’t because of her transgender status. Rather, the court reasoned that the employer may have engaged in unlawful sex stereotyping. Sex stereotyping definitely violates Title VII.

Did a federal court just rule that transgender discrimination is sex discrimination?

September 25, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

Back in April, the EEOC concluded that transgender discrimination is discrimination based on sex and, therefore, violates Title VII. That same month, a federal court denied another employer’s motion to dismiss the sex discrimination claims of a transgender employee. However, in denying the motion to dismiss, the court did not conclude that transgender discrimination is sex discrimination. Rather, it reaffirmed that Title VII prohibits sex stereotyping; i.e., when an employer takes action because an employee does not conform to the employer’s sex- or gender-based preferences, expectations, or stereotypes.

New GOP bill in Congress addresses equal pay for men and women

September 24, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

How about that!