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

Discrimination / Harassment

Stick to your story: Don’t shift explanation for termination

06/22/2009

One of the most legally dangerous things you can do after you terminate an employee is change the reason for ending the employment relationship. Instead, decide on a defensible rationale at the time of the termination. Document that decision and all the supporting evidence. Then remind execs and supervisors to stay on script.

Consent doesn’t mean it wasn’t sexual harassment

06/22/2009

Employers sometimes mistakenly believe that consensual sexual activity between a subordinate and a supervisor isn’t sexual harassment. That’s simply not the case. Fear or threats of losing one’s job can be enough to force an employee to “consent,” but agreeing to participate doesn’t rule out a later sexual harassment lawsuit.

Pregnant poor performer: Can we fire her?

06/22/2009

Q. We have a pregnant employee who is planning to take maternity leave soon. Her performance has deteriorated badly during her pregnancy, but we don’t think her pregnancy has anything to do with it. Can we terminate?

Better heed Ledbetter: Audit pay policies to ensure equal pay

06/16/2009

Under the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, each paycheck that unfairly pays a worker less than it should is a discriminatory act. Now is the time to audit your pay policies. Involve your attorneys—to take advantage of attorney-client privilege protection while you correct any discriminatory practices you uncover.

Feel free to reassign employees if it’s justified—you won’t be liable for retaliation

06/12/2009

Ever since the Supreme Court decided the White v. Burlington Northern case in 2004, retaliation lawsuits have been all the rage. But lately there’s been good news for employers. Courts have been refining the retaliation standard for almost five years and have begun concluding that truly minor work changes aren’t retaliation.

Declining to cooperate with investigation isn’t protected

06/12/2009

Before an employee can sue for retaliation, she has to show she participated in some form of protected activity—filing an EEOC or internal discrimination complaint, for example. But what about refusing to cooperate with an employer’s investigation?

You’re now strictly liable for supervisor sexual harassment

06/12/2009

In a significant ruling interpreting the Illinois Human Rights Act, the Illinois Supreme Court recently expanded employers’ potential exposure to sexual harassment claims and damages by holding that an employer is strictly liable for sexual harassment committed by a supervisor, even if the supervisor does not directly supervise the employee who is harassed.

Does the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act protect employees other than women?

06/12/2009

Q. Carlos, a longtime Latino employee, frequently complains that he is paid less than his white, non-Latino counterparts. He blames this pay discrepancy on a previous supervisor who allegedly denied him several promotions in the late 1990s because of his national origin. I have heard about the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Could it affect us in this case?

Bias settlement chips $500,000 out of Ceisel Masonry

06/12/2009

Suburban Chicago-based Ceisel Masonry has settled a race and national-origin discrimination suit with the EEOC for $500,000.

Make firing decisions locally so possible lawsuit can’t morph into something larger

06/11/2009

Here’s added incentive to handle terminations and other employment actions at the local level. When employees sue, their attorneys often look to expand the lawsuit beyond one person. They’re trying to find larger patterns of discrimination. This strategy can sometimes succeed if higher-ups in the company made the decision and based it on a common policy or framework.