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

Employment Law

Employees post online reviews? They must disclose relationship

09/24/2010
Be careful if your employees are spreading the word about your company’s products and services online. Last year, the FTC issued new Enforcement Guidelines that require employees to disclose their relationships with their employer whenever they post comments or positive reviews about their employer’s product on a social media site.

Would-be bartender pours Applebee’s a shot of trouble

09/24/2010
An Applebee’s restaurant in Fayetteville is facing an EEOC sex discrimination lawsuit after managers allegedly reneged on a promise to promote Amanda Antisdel to a bartending position and then hired a less experienced man instead.

Yates Construction settles race case with money–and more

09/24/2010

Stokesdale-based Yates Construction has agreed to pay two black employees $30,000 to settle racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation charges. Rodney McCants and a co-worker claimed they were subject to racial epithets and jokes in the workplace. When McCants complained about the ongoing harassment, Yates Construction fired him.

Don’t suggest delaying EEOC filing near deadline

09/24/2010
Here’s a tip that could save your organization from a protracted legal mess: When an employee says she’s considering filing an EEOC complaint and you know she doesn’t have much more time left, don’t do anything to dissuade her from filing.

Warn supervisors against any statements about race

09/24/2010

When a supervisor makes negative comments about an employee of a particular race or national origin, that can easily be interpreted as discrimination. And such statements can be enough to propel a lawsuit past the initial stages. Even if the case is later dismissed, a derogatory statement may cost tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and lost time.

Boss’s past misbehavior doesn’t automatically make employer liable for future misdeeds

09/24/2010
Under North Carolina state law, employers can be held liable for wrongs committed by employees under some limited circumstances. But what if the employer simply knows the supervisor discriminated against a pregnant employee in the past? Does that mean that anytime a subordinate is pregnant, her employer can be liable because it should have known the supervisor would discriminate against another pregnant employee?

Worker quits in a huff and sues? Court: Employers need chance to fix problem

09/24/2010

Courts are starting to toss out lawsuits brought by employees who quit at the first sign of trouble without at least trying to work out a solution. Judges aren’t as willing as they were in the past to accept quitting as just another form of termination. Instead, they seem to be telling employees they need to give their employers a chance to fix problems before resorting to litigation.

If you have doubts about FMLA eligibility, don’t hesitate to seek a second medical opinion

09/24/2010

Back in August, we told you how a federal court had dismissed a case involving a woman who had taken her child out of day care for the summer and asked for FMLA leave so she could care for him until school started. (See “School’s out for summer! But the FMLA doesn’t cover day care”.) Now the same court has reinstated the lawsuit after taking another look at the facts.

Depression no excuse for missed EEO deadlines

09/24/2010

Federal government employees have tight deadlines for initiating discrimination complaints. In most cases, they must do so within 45 days of the alleged discriminatory act. Miss the deadline, and the case ends. But there are exceptions. For example, if an employee is severely incapacitated, she may be exempted from contacting an agency’s EEO office within 45 days. However, as a recent case shows, mere suffering from depression and anxiety isn’t enough to extend the deadline.

Don’t assume temps are independent contractors

09/24/2010
Some temporary agencies and employee-leasing firms sell their clients on the idea that temp workers won’t be employees of the client. Instead, they will be either independent contractors or employees of the temp agency. Those claims may not hold up in court, because North Carolina has strict tests for who is an employee and who isn’t.