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

Discrimination / Harassment

DHL will deliver $200K for national-origin discrimination

02/01/2013
Dallas-based DHL Global Forwarding has agreed to pay $201,000 to settle charges that it failed to stop super­visors from harassing Hispanic em­­ployees.

Isolated slur doesn’t justify harassment lawsuit

02/01/2013
Good news for employers worried that a single inflammatory utterance could land them in big legal trouble: Courts generally won’t hold an employer responsible.

When you need to trim workforce, focus RIF criteria on measurable factors

02/01/2013
The key to a successful, challenge-proof reduction in force is using objective, measurable factors to determine who stays and who goes. That greatly reduces the likelihood that a former employee who loses his job to a RIF will win a discrimination case.

Considering after-the-fact paper trail to justify firing?

02/01/2013

Move cautiously when dealing with an employee who complains about harassment and discrimination—especially if the complaint involves a supervisor who now wants to terminate him. Unless you have a pre-existing paper trail showing poor performance before the complaint, going back to create one is dangerous.

When religious accommodation costs too much

02/01/2013

Employees who must miss work because of religious restrictions are entitled to reasonable accommodations. While employers must look for sensible solutions, that doesn’t mean they have to redesign their workforce, buy additional equipment or otherwise change the way they do business if it would be too expensive or cumbersome.

When discipline differs, be sure to document why

02/01/2013
Here’s a timely reminder that you should carefully document disciplinary actions and make sure there is no unintentional discrimination. The key is to thoroughly consider the appropriate punishment for each transgression, taking into account all the details.

‘Protected’ Job Applicants

02/01/2013

HR Law 101: A “protected” applicant is a person with one or more of the characteristics defined by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (race, color, sex, national origin, religion), is age 40 or older or has a disability. If your hiring process tends to screen out certain classes of applicants, you could be libel for discrimination …

From New York to New Mexico: It’s legal to adjust pay based on local standards

01/31/2013

Don’t let pay concerns get in the way of a transfer. Feel free to adjust compensation to account for different market rates in different locations. Courts have said it’s perfectly fine to adjust salaries to suit local standards. Just make sure your compensation decisions are consistent when it comes to protected characteristics.

When interviewing, when is it OK to ask applicant about her sexual history?

01/29/2013

We all know that hiring managers are supposed to avoid personal or intrusive questions when interviewing job applicants. However, under some limited circumstances, getting answers to such questions may be relevant and necessary to the hiring process. Make sure hiring managers know the line before they step into any interview.

Sex bias suit airs law firm’s allegedly dirty laundry

01/25/2013
After the EEOC concluded that a female partner in the Philadelphia office of the Greenberg Traurig law firm had been underpaid by $50,000, she decided to get even.