A few months ago, I was waxing poetic about plutonium, how to establish essential job functions, and quality-testing diet scrapple. What got into me?
Now, I’ve got a cautionary tale, in the form of a recent federal court opinion, to help you good folks navigate away from some of the Americans with Disabilities Act traps. Lest you like litigation and lawyer bills.
//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js
I’ll be back tomorrow.
It was déjà vu all over again yesterday.
In its much anticipated decision in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc. (opinion here), the Second Circuit concluded that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not cover discrimination based on sexual orientation.
You wouldn’t fire someone because they complained to you about sexual harassment at work. For starters, that would violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But, Title VII’s anti-retaliation provisions are much broader than that.
By Versageek (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons
Allowing an alcoholic to attend AA to remain clean and sober? That works.
But, accommodating an alcoholic who “falls off the wagon,” gets a DUI, and needs time off from work because he is incarcerated? Not so much.
Today, my friends, is National Cheesesteak Thursday. Started back on Thursday, March 24, 1994, by four high school classmates of mine, this is a day to celebrate with some quality ribeye, an Amoroso roll, and your choice of American, Provolone, or Cheez Whiz.
Just never Swiss. That mistake cost John Kerry the White House in 2004.
In honor of NCT, and because out-of-towners often ask me, “Eric, what’s the best cheesesteak in Philly,” I’m gonna rank my Top 5. Heck, I’ll do you one better. I’m going to rank the Top 5 sandwiches — any sandwich — in Philly.
No, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals didn’t say, “Oh, word?” But, it did just toss a $2,600,000 jury award in favor of a pharmacist in an Americans With Disabilities Act case.
_in_Hamburg_2.jpg "By Achim Schleuning (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)], via Wikimedia Commons")
A few weeks ago, a reader emailed me and asked if I would weigh in on how businesses should address employees talking about politics at work.
On the one hand, in the private sector, there are no First Amendment Rights. Free speech is a big myth. ( I suppose that the National Labor Relations Act could muddy the waters a bit; but, for this post, let’s pretend it doesn’t). And there’s practically nothing that would prevent a private employer from clamping down on employee discussions about politics at work.
On the other hand, an employer could violate bar rules and condone political speech. However, that could lead to problems for the employer, as in bad press or a lawsuit.
A new bill, introduced last week in this U.S. House of Representatives, would amend the Family and Medical Leave Act to permit parents to take up to 12 weeks of leave to mourn the death of a child. Continue reading
Rideshare service, Lyft, Inc., allegedly violated Philadelphia’s Fair Criminal Records Screening Standards Ordinance, also known as Ban the Box, according to this press release from the law firm Outten & Golden LLP. Continue reading
The Employer Handbook Blog