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” d/b/a (just for today) “Eric’s 36th-Birthday Post”.
*** Sigh ***
Ahh…let’s get to today’s question:
Yesterday, I presented “Reducing the Risk of Wage and Hour Litigation” with my partner, Jennifer Platzkere Snyder, at ALM’s In-House Counsel Labor and Employment Law Forum. We talked best practices, common mistakes, and Supreme Court.
We also dipped into some hot issues, the hottest of which, by far, based on audience engagement, was unpaid internships. Oh boy, is it easy for companies to potentially screw up unpaid internships. Just ask Charlie Rose and Harper’s Bazaar.
Want to get ’em right without running afoul of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Six steps to success follow after the jump…
Yawn…
The Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board recently released a 10-page summary of operations for FY 2011. But, you can find a short summary here.
But, if you think they do — maybe you read this article last week — then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you, sucker.
Come on! The sky isn’t falling. Demanding social media access from employees and potential hires and is most definitely the exception and not the rule. And I’ll set the record straight on this bad business practice after the jump…
Remember when I told you that a prevailing defendant could recover all electronic discovery costs? I lied.
Oh, let off some steam and stick around. Allow me to explain. Actually, I’ll let Phil Miles at Lawffice Space explain:
Last Friday, the Third Circuit released a definitive opinion regarding taxation of e-discovery costs against losing litigants…Judge Vanaskie (who I’ll note is pretty hip to technology issues) largely vacated an order awarding $360,000 in e-discovery costs to the defendant, slashing it by more than 90%.
A state court judge in Pennsylvania has come up with a new way to afford litigants access to social media as part of discovery in a pending civil action. Daniel Cummins at Tort Talk has the details:
The Judge’s page long Order does not provide the background on the case leading up to this Motion and Order, or why such discovery was pursued by the Plaintiff.
While the Court did grant the Plaintiff access to the Defendant’s Facebook page and ordered the Defendant not to delete any info from the Facebook profile, the Defendant was granted permission to change his login name and password after seven (7) days following his compliance with the Court’s Order.
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court in Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Md. held that state employees have no cause of action under the self-care provision (last bullet point in the hyperlink) of the Family and Medical Leave Act. In plain English, if you work for a State employer, and you need time off work for a serious health condition that leaves you unable to perform the essential functions of your job, the FMLA does not require that your employer give you any time off.
Yesterday’s SCOTUS opinion does not affect the FMLA rights of two classes of eligible employees:
- Employees of public agencies; and,
Let’s say you operate a business in NJ. Your disabled employee comes to you requesting an accommodation for his disability. Does the mere failure to provide that accommodation trigger a claim under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD)? What about under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)?
I have two recent cases and two different answers — depending on whether you are in state or federal court, plus some general accomodation tips for employers after the jump…
Below are summaries of four pieces of legislation of which employers should take note:
- Protecting Older Workers Against Discrimination Act. Senator Tom Harkin (IA-D) introduced this bill last week. It would overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. and lower the burden of proof for employees to prove age discrimination claims.
- National Right to Work Act. Senator Jim DeMint (SC-R) has introduced this bill to “preserve and protect the free choice of individual employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, or to refrain from such activities.”
I’ll tell you why, after the jump…
The Employer Handbook Blog