The Employer Handbook Blog

Is rejecting a sexual advance, without reporting it, protected activity?

March 18, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Of all employment claims presented to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, retaliation numero uno. It’s been that way since 2010.

There are three essential elements of a retaliation claim: (1) protected activity — opposition to discrimination or participation in the statutory complaint process; (2) adverse action; and (3) causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action.

This post focuses on “opposition to discrimination.” Specifically, is withdrawing from what one perceives to be a sexual advance by one’s employer opposition to discrimination and, thus, a protected activity?

The answer after the jump…

* * *

That’s what he said: The infamous Eagle v. Morgan LinkedIn case is ovah!

March 15, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

On March 12, a federal court in PA resolved the first HUGE LinkedIn account dispute case involving an employee and former employer. I’ve written about out it a few times previously. (Here, here,and here).

The latest decision is involved. And rather than pontificate — too many syllables — I’ll defer to Venkat Balasubramani, who has the full scoop here.

My laziness knows no ends. Unless those ends involve a medium-rare burger, wrapped in bacon.

GUEST POST: A guide to creating a comfortable workplace

March 14, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Today we have a guest blogger at The Employer Handbook. It’s Peter Ames. Peter Ames writes this piece on behalf of Office Genie, a desk and office space market place in the United Kingdom

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

NLRB to ask Supreme Court to review its latest recess appointments

March 13, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Back in late January, a federal appellate court ruled that President Obama lacked the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board. More on that here.

In this press release issued yesterday, the NLRB announced that would seek Supreme Court review. Quoted below is the press release:

The National Labor Relations Board has determined not to seek en banc rehearing in Noel Canning v. NLRB, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit held that the January 4, 2012 recess appointments of three members to the Board were invalid. The Board, in consultation with the Department of Justice, intends to file a petition for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court for review of that decision. The petition for certiorari is due on April 25, 2013.

100% pure settlement offer? If not, it may be ADMISSIBLE … AT … TRIAL!

March 12, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Most parties (and their attorneys) expect that settlement communications are not admissible at trial. There’s even a federal rule of evidence on this subject. However, a federal court recently recognized an exception. But, with all due respect to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, the opinion is a little dry.

So, after the jump, I spiffed it up a bit — Point Break style, brah — with a few takeaways for practicing attorneys.

This is your wake-up call.

* * *

An EEOC complaint is not your free pass to goof off at work

March 11, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Or sexually harass your co-workers.

Unless, of course, you consider my working Hollywood manuscript: “An EEOC Complaint Is Your Free Pass to Sexually Harass.” I know, the title needs work, but with ~~C. Thomas Howell~~, ~~Tawny Kitaen~~ real star power and a producer.

** Immediately regrets sixth shot of Drambuie with breakfast **

There’s a point to all of this, and some employer tips too, after the jump…

* * *

New FMLA requirements on posters and notices start today

March 8, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

“Damn you, Department of Labor! It’s 12:00:01 on March 8, 2013. I keep refreshing this stupid site and nothing is happening! I NEED FORMS!!!!”

— Absolutely no one in HR.

Actually, the forms have been available for some time now, slacker.

In 77 tweets, what employers can learn about EEOC enforcement #EEOCHR

March 7, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

I had two topics on the brain to blog about:

Whether, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, being on time is an essential function of the job. Fortunately, Daniel Schwartz addressed that yesterday here at the Connecticut Employment Law Blog.
As a follow-up to yesterday’s wage-and-hour / Daylight Savings Time post, exploring how DST impacts tracking intermittent leave taken under the Family and Medical Leave Act.

{Go take a bath right now to cleanse yourself of the employment-law dorkness that hit you from reading No. 2}

Instead, after the jump, I have, well, you read the title to this post. These are my tweets (and several retweets) from the “EEOC Overview and HR Mixer” I attended yesterday — hashtag #ubernerd #EEOCHR

{Better grab the soap and turn on that bath again. You’ve been warned.}

* * *

CHEATSHEET: How to pay employees for Daylight Savings Time work

March 6, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

This Sunday, Daylight Savings Time begins, as we push the clocks forward one hour at 2:00 AM on March 10, 2013.

Did someone say Clocks?

How does the time change affect the manner in which you pay hourly non-exempt employees who work the graveyard shift? I’ll let the Department of Labor explain:

New federal bill would ban credit checks on employees and applicants

March 5, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Yesterday, I discussed some pending federal legislation that would expand the FMLA to cover part-time employees. Now, I hear that another bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, known as the Equal Employment for All Act, would amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to prohibit the use of consumer credit checks against prospective and current employees for the purposes of making adverse employment decisions.

A copy of the Act and more details on employer credit checks after the jump…

* * *