Articles Posted in Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment

Want 5 court-approved workplace anti-harassment tips? Read this…

September 18, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

You’ve got an anti-harassment policy. All managers and employees have copies and you just completed training on the policy for your entire workforce.

Sweet!

But is your policy bulletproof? I mean really bulletproof?

And if an employee claims that a harasser lurks in your workplace, if sued, will a court agree that the steps you have taken were reasonably designed to end the harassment?

Just how confident are you?

After the jump, some not so obvious pitfalls from a recent federal-appellate-court decision and six ways (5 from the court; 1 from me) to help you stay legal and out of the courtroom.

* * *

Is an employee with managerial duties “similarly situated” to a manager?

September 13, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Maybe it’s the luck of the draw, but most of the discrimination cases I defend are hostile work environment cases, where an alleged harasser supposedly has made an employee-victim’s life miserable with certain comments, jokes, gestures, touchings, you name it.

Far less often do I encounter disparate-treatment claims. A disparate-treatment claim is one where an employee claims that another similarly-situated employee in another class was treated more favorably because of his/her protected class. For example, a female employee claims that similarly-situated male employees are paid more because they are men.

Sounds like the facts of a recent case decided right in my backyard in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This case provides a great opportunity to go back to school on what it means to be similarly-situated…after the jump…

* * *

“How can I keep the white girl?”

September 7, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

[Editor’s Note: Because “Playing the Race Card” was already taken]

The title of this post is comprised of the seven poorly-chosen words from a Vice President of Operations at a Detroit casino right before the casino terminated a white employee for allegedly botching supervision of a dealer card shuffle.

What do you think? Do we have a live race-discrimination claim? Oh yeah, we do! Details after the jump, as well as thoughts on employers who strive to maintain racial balance in the workplace…

* * *

ADA does not require indefinite break from essential job functions

September 4, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Readers of this blog know (here, here, and here) that if a disabled employee requests an indefinite leave of absence from work, the Americans with Disabilities Act does not require you to provide it. Why? Because that accommodation is not reasonable.

[Editor’s note: Obsessed much, Eric? Three posts about the same topic?!? Why don’t you just share with your readers about how you refused to drink anything other than water for hours after yesterday’s Labor Day lunch of chilaquiles, just so you could continue to savor the satisfying burp-flavor of red sauce and refried beans. TMI, Eric. TMI….]

To the two remaining readers who made it this far, I’ll school you on requests for an indefinite reprieve from essential job functions after the jump…

*** belches, draws dirty look from wife, smiles ***

* * *

No ADA accommodations required for non-disabled employees

August 29, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Last week, we had a two-part series on the interplay between the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The former clearly obligates employers to afford leave to an eligible employee to care for a sick child. But, what about the latter? That is, must an employer provide leave from work as a reasonable accommodation to an employee to permit her to care for a disabled child?

In a case decided earlier this month (Magnus v. St. Mark United Methodist Church), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ADA does not require employers to provide reasonable accommodations to non-disabled workers.

However, that does not mean that employers have carte blanche to discriminate against employees who must care for disabled loved ones. Here are a couple of other lessons from the Seventh Circuit:

PA: Forced reinstatement of a sexual harasser violates public policy

August 28, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Courts analyzing anti-discrimination statutes such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act mandate that employers educate employees about discrimination in the workplace and provide a way for them to complain. Then, once made aware of discrimination in the workplace, the employer must take steps that are reasonably designed to end the discrimination. That could mean anything from a verbal warning up to termination of employment. That decision is up to the employer.

In Phila. Housing Authority v. AFSCME, after investigating a complaint of sexual harassment, a unionized employer with a zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment fired the alleged harasser. The union subsequently filed a grievance that eventually led to arbitration, at which time the arbitrator deemed the alleged harasser’s behavior to be “lewd, lascivious and extraordinarily perverse.” Notwithstanding, the arbitrator concluded that a verbal warning would have sufficed, rather than termination, and ordered the alleged harasser reinstated and made whole.

On appeal, the PA Supreme Court blasted the arbitrator’s decision, while emphasizing the public policy against unlawful harassment in the workplace.

GUEST POST: FMLA & ADA: Never the twain shall meet? (Part II)

August 23, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

Today, Janette Levey Frisch is back as guest blogger to wrap up her two-part series on the interplay between the between the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act. (You can read Part One here).

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.

Click through to read more about how the FMLA and ADA may cross paths in your workplace….

(And if this awesome two-part series inspires you to want to guest blog at The Employer Handbook? Email me.)

* * *

GUEST POST: FMLA & ADA: Never the twain shall meet? (Part I)

August 22, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

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.

Part one of Janette’s post on the interplay between the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act, an HR-compliance must-read, follows after the jump…

(Want to guest blog at The Employer Handbook? Email me.)

* * *

D-I-S-M-I-S-S-E-D! Court punts Playboy-posing cheerleader’s bias claims.

August 17, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

[If you listen carefully, you can actually hear the sound of page-hits and prurient reader interest cascading at The Employer Handbook. It’s got a little funky Salt n’ Pepa beat to it…]

Last May, I ~~slobbered over~~ blogged here about a former Indianapolis Colts’ cheerleader who sued the team claiming that the Colts discriminated against her on the basis of her race (Asian) and national origin (Indonesian).

Earlier this week, the court ruled on the Colts’ motion to dispose of the case. While I think we can all agree that this sort of hard-hitting blog fodder is better suited for a Monday post, I’m going to blog the heck out of the Court’s decision…after the jump. (It’s a long post, but it’s soooooo worth it).

* * *

Employer wins lawsuit despite a “pattern of systematic sexual harassment”

August 15, 2012 | by Eric B. Meyer

In Mann v. Staples, Inc., a female employee received unwelcome comments about her appearance and physique, was kissed and groped, and called a “skank ass bitch.” The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, described this as a “pattern of systemic sexual harassment” — one in which the alleged harasser appeared to have never received any anti-harassment training.

So, what did the court do? It affirmed summary judgment for the employer and dismissed the plaintiff’s Complaint.

What?!?

Find out why, after the jump…

* * *

You know that scientist in the action movie who has all the right answers if only the government would just pay attention? If you want a nerdy employment-lawyer brain to help you solve HR-compliance issues proactively before the action sequence, I’m here to help. I'm not only an EEOC-approved trainer, I offer day-to-day employment counseling, workplace audits and investigations, and other prophylactic measures to keep your workplace working while you focus on running your business. And for those employers in the midst of conflict, I bring all of my know-how to bear as your zealous advocate. I’m a trial-tested, experienced litigator that has represented companies of all sizes in a veritable alphabet soup of employment law claims, such as the ADA, ADEA, CEPA, FMLA, FLSA, NJLAD, PHRA, Title VII, and USERRA. I also help clients litigate disputes involving restrictive covenants such as non-competition and non-solicitation agreements, as well as conflicts over use of trade secrets and other confidential information. For more about me, my practice, and my firm, click on my full bio.