Rep. Carolyn Maloney [D-NY14] recently introduced H.R. 1440: Family and Medical Leave Enhancement Act of 2011 (FMLEA) in the House of Representatives.
What is this new bill? And what will it mean for new employers if it passes? (Hint: It may have something to do with the picture on the left)
All the details, after the jump.
Back on March 22, I reported that City Council would vote on the “Fair Criminal Screening Standards” bill, a measure that would forbid city employers from discriminating or retaliating against job candidates with criminal convictions. City Council has since approved the bill and Mayor Nutter has signed it.
For more details about this bill and the effect it will have on employers, check out my March 22 post and this e-Alert from Marjorie Obod and Katharine Hartman of Dilworth Paxson LLP.
One thing is clear, Philadelphia employers better act hella-fast to update their employment applications, as this new law will take effect 90 days from when Mayor Nutter signed the bill. So what are you waiting for? (Yes, you have time to watch both the CGI and Alient Ant Farm cover of “Smooth Criminal”)
In an unpublished opinion, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied a Pennsylvania company’s attempt to enjoin a former employee, who had entered into several restrictive covenants with the company, to compete directly against the company and solicit its customers.
What did this employer do wrong and how can you learn from its mistakes?
After the jump…
In New Jersey, a private employer may not fire an employee who objects to or refuses to participate in any activity that the employee reasonably believes is illegal or would endanger public health, safety, or welfare. This is codified in New Jersey’s Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA).
The typical CEPA claim involves an employee who alleges that he/she was fired after complaining directly to management about some business-related conduct that the employee thought was legally or morally wrong. But what about when an employee confronts a customer, on the employer’s premises, about something the employee reasonably believes that the customer has done wrong? If the employee is later fired, does the employee have a viable CEPA claim?
Find out, after the jump…
What better way to celebrate the 100th blog post at https://www.theemployerhandbook.com than with booze, hookers, and penicillin shots an announcement that I will be contributing to HR and Social Media: Practical and Legal Guidance, a book available for sale this Summer from Thompson Publishing.
I will be writing about the role of social media as it relates to litigation and discovery.
You can view the full all-star lineup of contributors to this book here. These writers are not just lawyers who think they know social media. These are all social-networking employment-law attorneys who know wazzup, yo. So, clear a spot on your human resources or labor and employment law bookshelf for what promises to be a fantastic resource focusing on the intersection of social media and the workplace.
What happens when an employee claims to be a victim of discrimination or sexual harassment in the workplace, but fails to report the harassment to her employer? If the employer has a written anti-harassment policy, it should be able to satisfy its burden that the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of the opportunity to avoid harm.
Maybe not.
Employers will want to continue reading after the jump to make sure that they are taking appropriate steps to avoid bias and sexual harassment claims
A few weeks ago, I wrote about how the Maryland Department of Corrections was facing heat from the ACLU for requiring job applicants to divulge their Facebook passwords. It seems that the DOC has listened (not to me, but to the ACLU).
You can see the ACLU’s response, as well as a discussion of Facebook “privacy rights,” after the jump.
Thomson Reuters had such a bad week last week that I had to spread the news over two blog posts. Here is part one about how the National Labor Relations Board is set to file a complaint against Thomson Reuters for allegedly disciplining an employee who tweeted about labor/management relations.
After the jump, see how bloggers unite to try to stick it to the man for allegedly requiring them to work through their lunch hour without paying overtime…
Did a bunch of bloggers sue you last week for wage and hour violations?
Has the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) threatened to file a complaint against you for Twitter shenanigans?
Well, that was Thomson Reuters’ week. And, as you can imagine, it sucked.
I share their grief, after the jump…
* * *
Earlier this week, I posted a link to the new Fair Labor Standards Act final regulations.
After the jump, I have 15 more resources to help employers navigate the treacherous world of overtime, minimum wage, independent contractor vs. employee, what the FLSA requires, what the FLSA doesn’t require, and other wage and hour speedbumps.
The Employer Handbook Blog