We’ve talked a fair amount about sexual stereotyping at the ole Handbook.
Here I discussed the cluster created by offering crap assignments to a male employee because he fails to conform to a male stereotype.
And of course, we have my “Ravishing Rick Rude” theory of same-sex harassment, which a federal appellate court crapped all over.
Generally, a typical sexual harassment claim involves a supervisor or manager or co-worker making unwelcome sexual advances towards another employee.
But what if, instead of the harasser being one of your employees, it’s an independent contractor.
Does that absolve your company from liability? Is it a valid defense if one of your employees sues you for sexual harassment to point the finger outside of the company?
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.”
Try this one for size, folks.
In this case, an employee argued that her former employer retaliated against her, by terminating her for complaining about the favorable treatment a co-worker with a special needs child received.
Two big EEOC pet peeves right now are:
- employers who discriminate in the hiring process; and
- employers who violate the Americans with Disabilities Act based on misconceived notions about how an individual’s health could impact that person’s ability to perform essential job functions.
Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s Kimberly Erskine.
Ordinarily, when I’m offered a wage-and-hour guest blog post, I just yawn — much like you do with the FLSA posts I do myself. But, this one, written from employee’s perspective, is a worthwhile read for both employees and employers alike.
(Want to guest blog on an employment-law topic at The Employer Handbook? Email me).
* * *
Let this be a lesson to those who are thinking about selling “Wake The F*&k Up” Coffee, “The Hottest F*&king Nuts,” or “The Hottest F*&king Sauce.”
Recently, I read this article from Clark Kauffman in the Des Moines Register about a cashier at the Last Chance Market in Iowa, who was allegedly fired after she and a customer began discussing various sexual activities in front of other customers. These customers then complained to management about the sexual banter, hence the pink slip.
Not that the employer need a reason to fire the crude cashier. Presumably, she was an at-will employee. But, the stakes are raised when an employee files for unemployment compensation benefits. That is, generally speaking, a terminated employee will receive u/c, unless the termination is for some sort of willful misconduct.
Recently, I gave a webinar about the interplay between the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. One of the takeaways there was that, when an employee’s 12 weeks of FMLA leave expire, you need to be thinking about ADA implications rather than processing a pink slip at 12 weeks and a day. This is because additional leave may be a reasonable accommodation.
The same issues can arise if you have a pregnant employee. That is, you need to consider the interplay between the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the ADA.
A recent case shows how the ADA may apply to pregnant employees.
As an employment lawyer, part of my practice involves training employees and supervisors on employee handbooks. Most often, my training focuses on respect in the workplace.
During these sessions, I employ many techniques to discourage the workforce from engaging in behavior that could create a hostile work environment. Usually, I’ll put it like this:
“If you would feel uncomfortable sitting in a witness box while having to explain your behavior to a federal jury, then it’s not something that you should do in the workplace.”
How many of you have social media policies, which contain a provision that reads something like this…
“If you identify yourself as an associate of the Company and publish any work-related information online, you must use this disclaimer: ‘The postings on this site are my own and don’t necessarily represent the positions, strategies or opinions of the Company.'”
Yeah, I write these disclaimers all the time for clients. Apparently, they’re unlawful.
The Employer Handbook Blog