The Employer Handbook Blog

The Employee Free Choice Act (a/k/a Card Check) is back #efca #efcafail

October 7, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

Remember the Employee Free Choice Act? Back in 2009, the Employee Free Choice Act, also known as “card check,” was introduced in both the Senate and House. The bill had three components:

Requiring that an employer recognize a union if over half of the employees in the proposed bargaining unit signed union authorization cards (as opposed to voting for a union through a secret-ballot process);
Expedited contract negotiations; and
Harsher fines for unfair labor practices

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.

Everything you need to know about restrictive covenants and protecting confidential business information

October 1, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

Yesterday, I had the privilege of presenting a webinar for LexisNexis with my colleague, Larry Holmes, and Sterling Miller. Larry and I have served in the restrictive-covenant trenches together many times. Sterling serves as Senior Counsel at Gober Hilgers. He’s also the former General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer to Sabre Corporation and former General Counsel to Travelocity.com. And without any prodding from me, Sterling admitted to reading this blog. Clearly, he’s good people.

Anyway, about that webinar. The three of us riffed for an hour and twenty on the ins and outs of non-competition and non-solicitation agreements. Plus, we offered some drafting tips and discussed ways to protect confidential information. And, of course, I couldn’t resist intersecting those topics with social media. Secret sauce, anyone? At the end, we took 15 minutes of questions from folks like you.

If you’d like to get a copy of the webinar, I’m pretty sure that I can hook you up. (Don’t let me down, Lexis!) Drop me a line and I’ll do my best to take care of you.

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.

When your recently-fired employee shares the secret sauce on Twitter

September 28, 2015 | by Eric B. Meyer

No, the secret sauce isn’t ketchup. Or is it?

Literally. Continue reading

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!