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

Firing

Cross-dressing hair stylist blames firing on gay bias

08/26/2009

Daniel Brant liked to curl his eyelashes and wear mascara and heels when he went to his hair-stylist job at the Chop Shop on the Philadelphia campus of Temple University. When his boss transferred him to the salon’s South Street location and later fired him, he sued for discrimination.

Confront bigotry—it won’t go away by itself

08/25/2009

It may be tempting to ignore rumors about racial or other hostility in the workplace. But you do so at the company’s peril—especially if some of that hostility is coming from a supervisor who has the power to hire and fire.

Document rationale and process for every firing decision

08/25/2009

Courts seldom second-guess firing decisions if employers can articulate solid reasons for the discharge—and take the time to document their decision-making processes. That’s because employees who want to challenge their employer’s termination decisions have to raise suspicions that the employer’s reason was not credible and that it wasn’t really a motivating factor in the decision.

Depressed gas worker wins $1.8 million in ADA case

08/25/2009

An Atlantic City jury has awarded Scott Jones $1.8 million in his suit against his former employer, South Jersey Gas, after the company dismissed him for poor work performance. Jones claimed his poor performance was due to his battle with depression and that the company failed to discuss accommodations of his condition.

Fight harassment with a no-sex-talk policy

08/20/2009

For years, employers have grappled with the question of what exactly is “sexual harassment” and how much sexual banter is allowable. But lost in that debate is the fact that a workplace is just that—a place where work is supposed to be done. Here’s one good way to end this legal tightrope-walking and prevent potential problems down the line: Implement a policy that clearly bans sexual banter. Then punish those in violation.

Lessons from the Courts: Sept. 2009

08/20/2009

Discipline one day after complaint? See you in court … Obscure terms could trigger race-bias suit … Teach front-line staff how to handle legal papers … Employees can have more than one "employer" … Employee is her own lawyer? Don’t pull punches.

Porn on shared computer? Investigate carefully

08/14/2009

Your computer-usage policy no doubt prohibits visiting pornographic and other inappropriate sites. But what if someone surfs forbidden sites using a computer that an entire group of employees has access to? That makes it difficult to positively identify the guilty user. Your IT department can provide technical assistance so you can base your investigation and conclusions on facts.

When salesperson travels, where’s FMLA base?

08/14/2009

The FMLA applies to employees who have worked more than 1,250 hours and for one year—provided their employer has a staff of 50 or more working within 75 miles of the employee’s base. Typically, the base is where the employee reports. But what about a salesperson who travels over a set territory and works from home?

Chicago hotel to pay $90,000 to settle disability bias case

08/14/2009

Swissotel has entered into a settlement agreement after the EEOC alleged supervisors at the Swissotel Chicago harassed a developmentally disabled employee. According to the suit, hotel managers called the worker “retard” and ultimately fired him because of his disability.

Federal court defines limits for FLSA retaliation lawsuits

08/14/2009

As with many other federal employment laws, the Fair Labor Standards Act includes a retaliation provision that protects workers who complain that their employer has violated the law. Until recently, it wasn’t clear what kinds of complaints actually triggered the FLSA’s protections. That’s now changed.