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

Employment Law

Dump strict language policy; EEOC cracks down

09/01/2003
If your company requires employees to speak English at all times (even lunch hours and breaks), drop that policy now. Such broad English-only rules violate Title VII.
And even if …

FMLA doesn’t apply to workers who try to deceive you

09/01/2003
If you discover that one of your employees has either misused or lied about his leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), you’re well within your rights to fire …

EEOC proposes age-bias exemption for retiree health plans

09/01/2003
In an effort to stem the tide of companies discontinuing health benefits to retirees, the EEOC has proposed ex-empting retiree health plans from the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
…

Use telecommuters? Defuse 5 main lawsuit threats

09/01/2003
Telecommuting is popular with employers and employees. Com-panies with telecommuting programs can realize productivity gains, im-proved morale …

Organize your personnel files to minimize legal risk

09/01/2003

THE LAW. Maintaining personnel files can be a chore, but it’s the most important element in defending against claims from employees, ex-employees and regulators …

Pay for After-Hours Event if It’s Work-Related

09/01/2003

Q. Can we require full-time nonexempt employees to attend work-related functions after regular hours? If so, should this time be compensated? —M.A., Texas

Incremental vacation time is legal, but not best option

09/01/2003

Q. We have salaried, exempt employees who take increments of vacation time (anywhere from one hour to seven hours at a time) instead of one full day. Is this legal? Or should they take only full-day vacation? —C.D., New Jersey

Deflect Cupid’s Arrow With Anti-Fraternization Policy

09/01/2003

Q. We have two employees who started a relationship. One is married. The wife of the married employee came to our facility and demanded to speak with the other woman. We didn’t permit them to speak on the premises. Do we have any potential for liability in a situation like this, especially if it escalates? Can we do anything to discourage employee romances or is this strictly off-limits? —C.R., California

Even ‘harmless’ banter can create a hostile environment

09/01/2003
Issue: A new ruling lowers the bar on what courts consider sexual harassment.
Risk: Allowing “boys to be boys”, even if they don’t target anyone for abuse, can now cost …

O-V-E-R-Q-U-A-L-I-F-I-E-D can spell ‘lawsuit’

09/01/2003
Issue: With the job market flooded with experienced and skilled people, the temptation rises for hiring managers to use “overqualified” as a weeding-out method.
Risk: Courts could view your use …