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

Employment Law

Reducing salaries and hours: How to document?

07/17/2009

Q. We’ve reduced the salaries of our exempt employees and told them to work only 36 hours each week. Still, however, many of those employees continue to work 40 or more hours per week. Exempt employees feel uncomfortable documenting 36 hours, when, in actuality, they’ve worked many more hours than that. Should we ask exempt employees to document hours that are not necessarily true?

Does newly married worker need new W-4, I-9?

07/17/2009

Q. When an employee gets married, do we need a new W-4 to show her new name? What about a new I-9?

Instant response to complaint cuts harassment risk

07/17/2009

A female Dallas police officer complained that a co-worker touched her and called her “darling.” A quick internal investigation led to a warning and counseling for the co-worker. It never happened again. Still, the officer sued for sexual harassment …

DOL pays $500 million to uranium plant victims

07/16/2009

The Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Paducah, Ky., processed more than one million tons of uranium during the Cold War, often without adequate safeguards for employees. Now the U.S. Department of Labor has paid out more than $500 million in benefits to plant employees and their survivors.

No haircut, no job: Was it discrimination?

07/15/2009

A jury will decide whether Wackenhut Inc. discriminated against Lord Osunfarian Xodus when the security firm turned him down for a security guard position. Xodus, a Chicagoan who practices Rastafari, claimed he lost out on the job after he refused to cut his dreadlocks for religious reasons.

HR CSI: How to conduct a post-mortem of a legal claim

07/14/2009

If you’ve ever been caught up in an employment lawsuit, chances are you couldn’t wait for it to be over. Yet every case presents a valuable opportunity to prevent future problems and improve HR effectiveness by conducting an “autopsy” of the claim.

Religious accommodations: Must you let employee wear a nose ring?

07/14/2009

Federal anti-discrimination law says employers must try to “reasonably accommodate” employees’ “sincerely held religious beliefs or practices,” as long as the accommodations wouldn’t place an undue hardship on their organizations. What religious practices would be deemed legitimate in the EEOC’s eyes?

Job tasks changing? Don’t forget the FLSA

07/13/2009

Employees whose job tasks have changed may now be wrongly classified as exempt from overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. That’s a lawsuit waiting to happen, one that could quickly eat up any temporary savings you’re trying to achieve—especially if it turns into a class-action suit.

Penalize the worst of the worst more harshly

07/13/2009

There’s good news if you use objective and measurable productivity and goal targets to determine whether employees will receive promotions and pay increases. You can distinguish between degrees of failure to meet those goals.

In Brookville, if you’re going commando, you’re going home

07/13/2009

The Brookville, Fla., City Council has approved a new dress code for municipal employees, requiring them to observe “strict personal hygiene,” including the use of deodorant. An “observable lack of undergarments” is explicitly forbidden.