Last year, the EEOC saw the highest number number of charges of discrimination in it’s 50+ year history. This Everglades sponsored webinar is one you do NOT want to miss out on, especially with numbers like that. The following topics will be covered in this upcoming webinar:
- Which laws are enforced by the EEOC?
- What qualifies as “discrimination?”
- How to stay in compliance with various laws.
- And much more!
With today’s businesses and organizations on so tight a budget and the steep costs of an EEOC charge, both financially and beyond (reputation, morale, etc.), this is one webinar you are guaranteed you want to be in attendance to provide yourself with the knowledge to prevent such mishaps.
Date/Time of Webinar: August 19 2014 at 2:00 pm Eastern/11 am Pacific
Registration Link: https://cc.readytalk.com/r/wozdirtjzmme&eom
President Obama signed an Executive Order Monday banning discrimination against LGBT employees by federal contractors.
Last month, I blogged here that the White House had announced that it intended to eventually ban LGBT discrimination by federal contractors through Executive Order because the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), did not make it through Congress.
Since that time, several gay-rights groups withdrew their support for ENDA, fearing that it afforded “religiously affiliated organizations … a blank check to engage in workplace discrimination against LGBT people.” Read more…
By John E. Thompson
We wrote some time ago about a lower federal court’s determination in Glatt v. Fox Searchlight Pictures that at least two unpaid interns were “employees” for federal Fair Labor Standards Act purposes.
This ruling is now being reviewed by the New York-based Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (with jurisdiction over Connecticut, New York, and Vermont). The U.S. Department of Labor has submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in which it supports the lower court’s decision.
The Labor Department’s filing provides some interesting insight into its views about when an intern is an “employee” for purposes of the FLSA’s requirements. Read more…
By Annie Lau
As the global market grows seemingly smaller, more and more companies are expanding their reach around the world.
Some companies send U.S. employees overseas, while others hire locally, or even utilize local independent contractors. As in the United States, companies must be mindful of the risks involved when hiring independent contractors in their international operations.
While different countries have different levels of scrutiny when it comes to determining who is an independent contractor and who is an employee, many of the principles remain the same. The main questions deal with the company’s control over the person’s work. Read more…
Ban the box has gone viral.
And while the removal of this little check box has potentially made life easier for job seekers with a criminal past, it has created much confusion and frustration for employers.
If you haven’t been in the loop, “ban the box” is the catchy phrase that refers to removal of the check box on a job application asking whether a candidate has been convicted of a crime. Ban the box shows no signs of slowing down, and it’s creating new headaches, not to mention real risks, for employers across the country. Read more…
By Ilyse Wolens Schuman
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued new enforcement guidance on pregnancy discrimination and related issues, despite reservations expressed by some EEOC Commissioners.
In general, the five-part guidance explains Title VII‘s prohibition against pregnancy discrimination, describes individuals to whom the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) applies, discusses the expanded definition of “disability” under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and how it applies to pregnancy-related impairments, and sets forth examples of best practices and reasonable accommodations.
The guidance was approved by a 3-2 vote along party lines, with Commissioners Constance Barker and Victoria Lipnic voting against it. Read more…
By Steven E. Kaplan
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review Young v. UPS, a decision that will determine whether and to what extent an employer must provide pregnant employees with work accommodations, such as light duty, under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA).
On Jan. 9, 2013, the Fourth U.S. Court of Appeals, based in Richmond, VA., upheld the district court ruling in Young that:
- The employer did not “regard” a pregnant employee as disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); and, Read more…
By Eric B. Meyer
How many times has an employee provided you with an incomplete Family and Medical Leave Act certification? Oh, I don’t know, maybe a missing return date…
If the FMLA leave is foreseeable, then the employee must provide the employer with the anticipated timing and duration of the leave. However, where the FMLA leave is unforeseeable — think, car crash — then that information can wait if the employee herself doesn’t know her return date.
But that doesn’t mean you — yeah, you employer — should let it go. Read more…
By Eric B. Meyer
Mid-morning on Monday, the Internet broke shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 5-4 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc..
Jeez, I’m still cleaning out my Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook feeds.
In case your wifi, 4G, 3G, dial-up, TV, radio, and other electronics picked the wrong day to quit, the long and short of yesterday’s Supreme Court decision is this: Smaller, closely held (think: family owned) companies don’t have to provide Obamacare access to birth control if doing so would conflict with an employer’s religious beliefs. Read more…