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

Terminations

Don’t pile on reasons for firing; you’re spoiling for retaliation fight in court

04/15/2010

Let’s say you’ve got one very good reason to fire an employee, plus several other halfway decent reasons. Why not wrap them all into one big package of employee shortcomings when it comes time to show her the door? Because such overkill could play badly in court if the dismissed employee ever sues you.

EEOC settles bias suit involving Jehovah’s Witness, dress code

04/13/2010
Alliance Rental Centers recently agreed to pay $21,500 to settle an EEOC religious discrimination suit brought by a former employee whose religious beliefs kept him from complying with the company’s dress code. The conflict emerged when Tyler Templeton, who worked in the company’s Bridgeport Aaron’s Rents store, refused to participate in the “Red Shirt Friday” program in which employees wore special shirts to show support for the U.S. military.

Porn addicts? Blaming disability won’t work

04/08/2010

Some disabled employees believe their disabilities excuse them from following the workplace rules that others must abide by. That’s just simply not true. You can, and should, discipline insubordinate employees, even if their behavior could be caused by a disability.

N.Y. Department of Labor issues new WARN Act regs

04/07/2010

The New York Department of Labor has released new Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act regulations that are more stringent than federal WARN Act provisions. Employers with at least 50 workers (including part-timers) are covered. That means those employers must provide 90 days’ notice of a mass layoff, plant closing or relocation.

FMLA leave expired? Be equitable when firing

04/07/2010
If you terminate employees who have used up all their FMLA leave and still can’t come back to work, watch out! Make sure you don’t single out any particular class of employees for firing.

Use job skills test before hiring to make sure applicant is qualified

04/07/2010

It happens all the time: A manager decides to take a chance by hiring a marginally qualified applicant. Then, days later—as the new employee struggles—it becomes clear she can’t do the job. Employers have little choice but to terminate the worker. And then the former employee feels like she has little choice but to sue for some form of discrimination. What’s the best way to avoid those kinds of lawsuits?

Firing? Here’s when to keep manager out of it

04/07/2010

Employees who are fired shortly after complaining about a manager’s supposed discriminatory attitude may assume that the complaint led to the termination. And they’re almost sure to sue. To stop such lawsuits from going far, make sure the manager in question has nothing to do with the final decision to terminate. That’s good advice even if you don’t think he or she did anything wrong.

AK Steel sues former employees for stealing trade secrets

04/05/2010
West Chester-based AK Steel has filed suit against three former employees in Butler County Court, alleging that they stole company secrets when they went to work for a competitor.

Plenty of reasons to fire him? Ex-employee probably won’t get unemployment

04/05/2010
Employees are entitled to unemployment compensation only if they lose their jobs because of things over which they have little or no control. On the other hand, employees get no benefits if they’re terminated for improper conduct as defined by the employer.

Tighten up attendance policies, or get ready for an unemployment comp hit

04/05/2010

Here’s added incentive to have crystal-clear attendance policies: Employees who are terminated for violating unclear or confusing attendance rules may end up collecting unemployment compensation payments. Here’s why: Former employees can successfully argue that they were terminated through no fault of their own if they can show that the attendance policy was difficult to understand and comply with.