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

Employment Law

Ensure handbook doesn’t make FMLA promises you can’t keep

08/13/2008
An Indiana employer must now respond to charges it misled employees when it promised FMLA benefits in its handbook, even though the company is too small to be covered by the FMLA. The case, recently decided by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, shows the problems that arise when employers promise more than they are willing to deliver in their employee handbooks …

Make sure fitness tests don’t unfairly target women

08/12/2008
Some jobs obviously require that the employees who perform them be in excellent physical condition. For example, firefighters and others engaged in heavy physical work may have to be extremely physically fit. It’s legitimate for employers to test those physical abilities on a regular basis. Be careful, though, about how you administer those tests to men and women …

Civility is great—But you don’t have to guarantee it

08/12/2008
It’s a fact of life—not every employee is going to get along with everyone else in your shop. Some managers and supervisors will have more trouble managing a particular employee than others. However, unless the reason for a supervisor’s criticism is the employee’s protected status (e.g., race or age), the employee won’t win a hostile-environment lawsuit if the “hostility” isn’t extremely severe …

Develop procedures for breaks that accommodate disabilities

08/12/2008
Sometimes, employees with disabilities may need additional breaks as reasonable accommodations. But you don’t have to leave the timing or duration of the breaks entirely to the employee. If you do, it will be hard to tell whether the employee is taking a legitimate and necessary accommodations break or simply taking advantage of additional freedom. And that can lead to litigation …

Prejudgment, blind faith by HR may prove costly

08/12/2008
How HR handles discrimination complaints can mean the difference between winning and losing lawsuits. The key lies in using good faith when checking out allegations of discrimination. Do not automatically assume that either party is correct. Keep an open mind and conduct an impartial investigation, giving everyone a chance to present his or her version of events …

Sour environment doesn’t warrant constructive discharge

08/12/2008
Employees who believe they are being discriminated against and can no longer tolerate their work environments may quit and sue, claiming they had no choice. That’s the basis for a “constructive discharge” claim. But it takes more than an unpleasant work environment to justify the resignation as constructive discharge …

Poor performance review and improvement plan alone aren’t signs of retaliation

08/12/2008
Good news for managers and supervisors: Giving an employee a poor performance review and then placing the employee on an improvement plan isn’t an adverse employment action on its face. Employees can’t successfully sue unless a pay cut, lost benefits, a lost bonus or some other tangible, negative results accompany that poor evaluation or improvement plan …

Root out subtle but pervasive hostility—It’s harassment even if it’s not severe

08/12/2008
Tell your managers to take note: Allowing one or two employees to poison the workplace, even with low-level harassment, is dangerous. A constant barrage of racially tinged comments may warrant a jury trial if someone claims the workplace is a racially hostile environment. The charge: The harassment is pervasive, even if it is not severe …

Judge finds Wal-Mart guilty of 2 million violations

08/12/2008
Wal-Mart’s class-action woes are reaching cosmic proportions. Dakota County District Judge Robert King Jr. in June found the mega-retailer guilty of 2 million violations of Minnesota labor law. At the rate of $1,000 per violation, that could add up to $2 billion in fines …

Same-Sex marriage and employee benefits in Minnesota

08/12/2008
In light of the recent California Supreme Court ruling allowing same-sex marriages in that state and legislation in Massachusetts that, in effect, legalizes same-sex marriages, Minnesota employers may wonder whether they now must provide benefits to same-sex partners of employees who were married in those two states. The short answer seems to be no …