Recently, I’ve focused blog posts on some quirky cases that make you think a bit. Yesterday, was the FMLA in Vegas case. Last week, was the EMT who argued that getting fired for groping a co-worker was discriminatory in light of his employer’s decision not fire an employee who hit a patient.
Today is not one of those cases.
That’s right folks. It’s time for another edition of “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.”
Let’s assume that your employee breaks his leg. Doctors tell your employee that he won’t walk normally for seven months. Without surgery, bed rest, pain medication, and physical therapy, he “likely” won’t be able to walk for more than a year after the accident.
Bottom line: The employee will heal, but it will take some time.
I blogged about it here back in October. My epic Lil’ Za Halloween costume. Both the NJ House and Senate had proposed legislation whereby a female employee affected by pregnancy could not be treated worse than other non-pregnant co-workers, but similar in their ability or inability to work.
Well, now, it’s the law, son! Under the new law, which Governor Chris Christie (R) signed on Tuesday, employers must provide reasonable accommodation to pregnant employees that will allow them to maintain a healthy pregnancy, or who need a reasonable accommodation while recovering from childbirth. Examples include bathroom breaks, breaks for increased water intake, periodic rest, assistance with manual labor, job restructuring or modified work schedules, and temporary transfers to less strenuous or hazardous work. An employer can avoid accommodation if it can establish that doing so would cause it undue hardship.
The new law takes effect immediately.
On MLK Day, with a few of my co-workers and my four-year-old son, I performed community service. We went to a local center and spent a few hours making peanut butter sandwiches to feed the homeless.
Actually, we spent a half-hour or so making sandwiches. Most of us spent the remainder of the time continuing to make sandwiches, while my son ate peanut butter.
Win-win.
Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s Samantha Hopkins. Samantha is a law student who just received her big break.
She gets to guest blog at The Employer Handbook!
(Want to guest blog on an employment-law topic at The Employer Handbook? Email me).
* * *
I give a lot of “respect in the workplace” trainings. And I generally tell the audience that, while a single offensive comment or act in the workplace is one incident too many, one instance generally does not create a winning lawsuit. That’s because a plaintiff must show that he/she was subjected to either severe (really, really bad) or pervasive (a lot of bad) behavior to establish a hostile work environment.
Now, there are some exceptions. New Jersey is one of the few states that has held that a single discriminatory comment can create an actionable hostile work environment claim.
But what if, instead of a slur, we have an assault; one which the plaintiff claims was not only unwelcome, but particularly disturbing?
That may be sugar coating it a bit.
A county employee, who applied for a lateral transfer, and ultimately received that transfer, was able to convince two judges on a federal appellate court that the transfer was discriminatory.
That’s right. An employee may have a discrimination claim for receiving the specific transfer he requested.
According to a recent study soon to appear in the Journal of Management, not only is Facebook a horrible predictor of how younger recruits will perform for your business — there is absolutely zero correlation between Facebook activity and job performance — but those who rely upon Facebook to help judge potential younger recruits, are more likely to disqualify African-American and Hispanic candidates, in favor of Caucasian Facebook users.
Kashmir Hill details the study here in a recent article on Forbes.
So, if failing to meaningfully distinguish between younger job candidates, while increasing your odds of being sued for disparate-impact discrimination appeals to you, well then, have at it hoss!
Sorry, Aquaman. You’re SOL, son.
But Aquaman does love to get down to MGMT, I’m told. So here you go…
Same goes for the plaintiff in this case — the telepathy part, not MGMT — in which the employer had a leave policy which dictated that employees may take up to six months of leave if unable to perform his/her job with or without reasonable accommodation. After that, it’s sayonara, unless prohibited by law, or if the employee requests a leave extension.
The Employer Handbook Blog