By Eric B. Meyer
Earlier this week, Representatives Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, Carolyn Maloney D-NY, Jackie Speier D-CA, and Susan Davis D-CA, introduced the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
What’s in the bill and how will it affect employers?
According to a press release from Rep. Nadler, the focus of the bill is on employers affording reasonable accommodations to pregnant workers and applicants: Read more…
By Eric B. Meyer
Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act protects the rights of employees to discuss wages and other benefits with each other and nonemployees. By maintaining a rule that restricts employee freedom in this regard, an employer violates Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
How does this play out in the real world?
An example comes from a recent case in which an upscale women’s clothing store had this in its employee handbook: Read more…
By Gregg Salka
A recent decision by New Jersey’s Appellate Court substantially broadens the scope of the state’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD) to permit any employee who is subjected to any discriminatory comments, even if the comments do not relate to that individual’s actual protected characteristics, to assert a hostile work environment claim.
The New Jersey LAD prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of race, religion, creed, color, ancestry, national origin, sex, age, marital status, domestic partner or civil union status, actual or perceived disability, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, atypical cellular or blood trait, genetic information, veteran status, liability for service in the Armed Forces of the United States, perceived inclusion in any of the aforementioned protected categories, or the fact that an employee engages in legally protected conduct.
The court decision also provides guidance confirming the steps that an employer can take to avoid liability. Read more…
By Eric B. Meyer
Maryland has a new law forbidding employers from demanding that job applicants and employees divulge online passwords. Two weeks ago, the federal government proposed similar legislation. And, last week, news surfaced that Delaware may be placing the same restrictions on employers.
But who needs to demand online passwords, when, according to this report from Consumer Reports, your employees are sharing way more information on Facebook than they realize?
Some of the highlights from the report and a few related tips for employers follow after the jump… Read more…
By Howard A. Mavity
For several years, we have encouraged employers to move away from safety-management programs which primarily track the program’s effectiveness based upon recordable injuries, and which utilize monetary-incentive programs based on the number of recordable workplace injuries.
Our principal reason for discouraging such programs is that recordable incidents focus on “lagging” indicators, may not identify causes, and may be affected by the capriciousness of timing and “bad luck.”
But employers now have another reason to increasingly shift away from programs primarily driven by recordables. Even before the current Administration took office, its leaders questioned the accuracy of employer record keeping and asserted that employees under report workplace injuries in order to participate in safety incentive programs, or as a result of pressure imposed upon them by employers. Read more…
By Eric B. Meyer
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before:
Oh, it gets better..after the jump. Read more…
By Jeremy J. Sharp
Employers beware: The Internal Revenue Service recently issued new revised audit guidelines for IRS auditors who review group health plans for COBRA compliance in the aftermath of a 10-year task force study. And, this review could end up being costly for your company if an IRS auditor should come knocking on your door.
Industry commentators feel these revised guidelines likely will trigger an increased audit emphasis by the IRS in respect to COBRA compliance. Chances are, if audited, most employers will have some sort of COBRA failure, inadvertent or otherwise. And, even if a compliance failure is unintentional, you still risk incurring stiff penalties.
For example, Section 4980B of the Internal Revenue Code imposes an excise tax for failure to comply with COBRA continuation coverage obligations and requirements. The $100 excise tax is assessed for each qualified beneficiary for whom the failure occurs, with a maximum of $200 per family. Read more…
By Eric B. Meyer
Two quick updates for you today — one labor, one employment.
Word has trickled in that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held a conference call with lawyers from the National Labor Relations Board, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, and informed them that the Court would rule by May 15 on a pending challenge to the NLRB “quickie” election rule changes. You can view those rule changes in this post I did last week.
And in case you missed yesterday’s post on new federal legislation that would bar employer demands for online passwords, be sure to check it out. Late in the day, I scored a copy of the bill, known as Social Networking Online Protection Act (SNOPA), and added a link. Read more…
By Steven Bernstein
On April 28, 2012, a federal judge with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia cleared the way for the National Labor Relations Board‘s expedited-election rule. It went into effect Monday, April 30.
The judge’s order is not a substantive ruling on the new regulations, which remain the subject of litigation. Rather, the order comes as a ruling on the request of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to temporarily enjoin the new rules until after a final ruling. The judge denied that request, refused to issue a temporary injunction, and the rules now go into effect.
That said, the court expects to issue a formal ruling on the merits by May 15, before any election under the new rule would likely take place. In the meantime, we encourage employers to take advantage of this rapidly closing window of opportunity by moving forward with plans to: Read more…
By Eric B. Meyer
A few weeks ago, as reported here, Maryland became the first state to pass legislation that would ban employers from demanding that employees or job candidates turn over their social media passwords.
Could a federal law be soon to follow?
Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y.,has introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives that would outlaw this practice nationally. The bill, known as Social Networking Online Protection Act (SNOPA), is broader than the Maryland bill. According to this press release from Congressman Engel, SNOPA not only covers employers, but also schools and universities. Read more…
“Please Join: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EmpoweringPeoplePower http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Whizible-Advance-Service-Management-Beyond-4082706”
— Sajal Ghosh on Hitting a Home Run in Talent Management: The Key is HR Analytics, 57 minutes ago
“Great advice on how to do networking correctly. thank you.”
— Exec Career Svcs on Authentic Networking: How You Can Build Your Extra “Team”, 2 days ago
“I like this. I see discussions on LinkedIn from time to time saying that Texas ranks #1 in creating jobs. What . . . ”
— Jacque Vilet on Weekly Wrap: Does it Every Pay For Someone to Fib on a Resume?, 2 days ago
“agreed”
— Carol Schultz on When You Reward, Make It About the Employee – Not the Employer, 2 days ago
“agreed”
— Carol Schultz on When You Reward, Make It About the Employee – Not the Employer, 2 days ago