The Employer Handbook Blog

Sleep with me, or you’re fired!

August 15, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Sex sells.

My most popular posts at The Employer Handbook — that’s based on you reading them (you’re all sick I tells ya, sick!!! And remember, I’m logging IP addresses) — generally involve some element of sexual behavior. You have the Brazilian self-stimulator. Actually, make that sexual behaviour — there’s the Australian hotel sex romp.

One of my readers asked if I’d heard about the recent sexual harassment lawsuit in Utah (the home of sex in a supply closet), in which a woman alleged, among other things, that her supervisor distributed a work schedule that included included “Mini-skirt Monday,” “Tube-top Tuesday,” “Wet T-shirt Wednesday,” “No bra Thursday,” and “Bikini top Friday.” Come on, now. You know me! Just this week, I read five articles (here, here, here, here, here) about it. You can find 23 more articles about “No bra Thursday” here.

“Guess my high score in Leisure Suit Larry.”

Then there’s the NY Post story (naturally) about a 23-year-old lesbian who claims that seven staff members in her real estate office groped, slapped, flashed, fondled and subjected her to racial abuse and death threats. One of the staffers allegedly offered her $60 for oral sex and told her all Puerto Rican girls are good at it.

Me? I like writing about these cases because it’s a good excuse to use stock sexual harassment photos from Google Images — like the one on the right, which, given the size of the shoulder pads in the lady’s jacket and the dimensions of that desktop computer — no doubt housing a 5.25 inch floppy disk drive — is a screencap from L.A. Law.

How about one more sexual harassment case for ya? This time, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals gets in on the act and reverses summary judgment in favor of an employer where the plaintiff alleged sexual harassment and retaliation when her boss forcibly kissed her, fondled her leg, propositioned her, asked her sexually explicit questions, described sexual activities he wished to perform, and then, after she spurned the advances and filed a harassment complaint, fired her (on the day she complained).

More on this and, of course, lessons for employers, after the jump…

* * *

Social media shenanigans that will get you fired…and maybe jailed

August 13, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

From TMZ.com:

Rapper The Game could face criminal charges after he tweeted the phone number of the sheriff’s station in Compton, CA — but told people it was the number to call for an internship — causing the station’s phone lines to become overrun with calls and delaying emergency services.

…

I have a turtle named Sparky. And Sparky is going to die.

August 12, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

On September 9, 2011, I am going to carve up Sparky and make a nice turtle soup, unless…

…Unless every one of my readers nominates me for the ABA Journal’s Blawg 100 Amici (a/k/a the 100 best damn law blogs on the interwebs). The nomination deadline is September 9.

I know what you’re thinking. Moron is ~~a cold, heartless bastard~~ recycling a stupid internet bit. And you would be right. I don’t own a turtle. My wife had a turtle once. It smelled and it bit her sister.

Six super social media and HR reads from this week

August 11, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Lots of good stuff on the interwebs this week about social media and human resources. Rather than breaking it up into a bunch of different blog posts, after the jump, I offer you a combination platter to enjoy with your morning coffee…

* * *

Calling all Bloggers: The Employment Law Blog Carnival returns

August 10, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

The next edition of the Employment Law Blog Carnival is coming up on August 17, 2011, where Jon Hyman will be hosting at his Ohio Employer’s Law Blog.

If you would like to participate in this month’s carnival, by Friday, August 12, please email John (jth@kjk.com) a link to a recent employment-law-related blog post. It does not matter if your post is written from the employer perspective or the employee perspective. But it must be employment-law-related and it must be a link to a post on your blog.

Thanks!

Fact or Fiction: Retaliation requires job-related action (e.g., firing)

August 10, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

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”.

Until about five years ago, a plaintiff had to prove a materially adverse employment action in order to recover for retaliation. (I addressed the complete three-part test for retaliation in yesterday’s post).

Not so anymore. As explained briefly after the jump, the rules for retaliation have changed.

* * *

Apparently, sex in a supply closet is not sexual harassment

August 9, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

At least that’s what a federal court in Utah opined.

I promise that this is not a prurient post gratuitously conceived to drive internet traffic to The Employer Handbook.

And this case has nothing directly to do with Pennsylvania, New Jersey or Delaware employers

(Ok, that last line was shameless. Google, please do not index this post).

Oh, what the heck, index away. After the jump, I’ll even throw in some good employer takeaways for all employers, including those in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware.

Darn it. I did it again…

* * *

New federal bill would greater protect breastfeeding employees

August 8, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Rep. Carolyn Maloney [D-NY14] is at it again.

A sponsor of a bill that would greatly expand the scope and reach of the FMLA, Rep. Maloney has co-sponsored another bill, the Breastfeeding Promotion Act of 2011, which would amend both the Fair Labor Standards Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect breastfeeding by nursing new mothers.

Under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which is part of Title VII, it is already illegal to discriminate in the workplace “because of sex” or “on the basis of sex,” which includes, but is not limited to, because of or on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. The Breastfeeding Promotion Act of 2011 would amend Title VII to explicitly include “lactation.”

Inquiring about retirement plans = age discrimination?

August 5, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

Let’s say that a company holds a meeting for older employees (all are over 49 years old). And the purpose of the meeting is to discuss the future expectations of the employees in attendance, including retirement options at the company. Then throw in a stray remark from the company, something like, “When people get older, they tend to slow down.”

What if one of the meeting attendees is later laid off? Is that age discrimination?

If the employer has any non-age-related reason for the layoff, then the answer is no, according to

Pottymouths don’t usually win sexual harassment lawsuits

August 4, 2011 | by Eric B. Meyer

A federal court has bounced a woman’s sexual harassment claims against her former employer because the court believed that the woman was not offended by the conduct about which she complained.

Some analysis and employer lessons after the jump…

* * *