• The HR Specialist - Print Newsletter
  • HR Specialist: Employment Law
  • The HR Weekly

Discipline / Investigations

Head-Office decision won’t insulate company from liability

08/01/2006

Don’t think that leaving the final firing decision to someone in company headquarters will shield your organization from a discrimination lawsuit. Even if the ultimate decision-maker doesn’t know the race, sex or age of the employee in question, the fired employee can still file a discrimination claim if he or she can point to lower-level bias that tainted the decision …

What does broad new definition of ‘Retaliation’ mean to you?

08/01/2006

Expect this summer’s blockbuster U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Burlington Northern v. White, to swell the number of retaliation complaints and legal claims …

Performance-Based Pay Cuts: Legal, not advisable

08/01/2006

Q. We do yearly performance evaluations, during which we review whether employees have met the expectations we laid out during the previous review. If these expectations were not met, can we legally decrease the employee’s salary as punishment? —A.L., Iowa

Overly specific discipline policy can spark liability

08/01/2006

Q. I’m the HR director, and our discipline policy is very complicated and has several different categories of offenses. It says that if employees commit offenses that may result in suspensions of more than three days, employees are allowed a pre-disciplinary counseling conference. Now, my manager thinks that conference should be skipped if the employee has already been counseled for a prior offense in the past 12 months. I’m concerned that this deviates from our policy. Can we do this? —S.D., Illinois

Lessons from the 2006 SHRM conference: Avoid discipline that makes ‘Example’ of workers

08/01/2006

Employee discipline, above all else, must be consistent. When it’s not, mistakes put employers at risk of messy discrimination claims …

New retaliation rules: What managers need to know

08/01/2006
Login Email Address Password I forgot my password To continue reading this page, become an HR Specialist Premium Plus member today! Your subscription includes: Ask the Attorney: Answers to your HR legal questions Compliance Guidance: Access to 7,000 HR news articles, updated daily, sorted by state State-by-State: Summaries of HR laws in all 50 states […]

Equal treatment is absolutely essential after employee’s complaint

07/01/2006

It may seem patently obvious, but judging from the number of lawsuits alleging retaliation these days, many employers still don’t understand the importance of equal treatment following a complaint …

New Limits on Public-Sector Whistle-Blowers

07/01/2006

In a victory for employers, the U.S. Supreme Court made it harder for public employees to sue when they claim to have been punished for speaking up about wrongdoing …

THREE CHAMPAGNE BOTTLES … TWO DIFFERENT PENALTIES

07/01/2006

Q. Two employees went to breakfast and drank three bottles of champagne to celebrate one’s birthday. One employee is an exempt employee who has been with us for seven years. The other is an hourly employee with the company for one month. I’d like to treat them differently: terminate the hourly employee and suspend the exempt employee for a week. Is that possible? —D.M., California

‘Last straw’ needn’t be egregious to justify firing

06/01/2006

Employers often bend over backward to give employees second chances. But when second chances turn into third and fourth chances, you’ll  probably lose your patience and send the employee packing. Some employers, however, wrongly believe that they must cite a particularly serious behavior or performance problem as the last straw before termination. As a new ruling shows, that’s simply not true …