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

Employment Law

Now that the ADAAA has been enacted, can former employee apply it retroactively?

08/06/2010
Q. One of our security employees uses a hearing aid. He could not pass the unaided hearing requirements of his job. As a result, we let him go. His layoff occurred in 2007, when he first brought a claim for an alleged violation of the ADA. He claims that with the subsequent adoption of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA), an employer is not allowed to consider mitigating measures in determining whether an employee has a disability. Can the ADAAA be retroactively applied so he is deemed to have a disability under the ADA?

Supreme Court expands time to sue over policies with disparate impact

08/06/2010
There may be a ticking time bomb lurking in your employment policies and practices. It may go off at any time, when you least expect it. During its most recent term, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that employers can be held liable upon the use of employment practices that have a disparate impact on employees, no matter how long ago the challenged practice was adopted.

VA medical center police sue for alleged retaliation

08/06/2010
Bay Pines Medical Center, a Department of Veterans Affairs facility in St. Petersburg, has been sued by police officers who allege they were retaliated against when they came forward with discrimination charges.

EEOC asks: Is Hernando County a hotbed of age discrimination?

08/06/2010
A former Hernando County public works director has filed an EEOC complaint alleging that his discharge in January was part of a county plan to get rid of older, highly paid employees. Charles Mixson, who is 61 years old, claims that the county wants to terminate all managers over age 55.

Tell bosses: Accommodation backlash can be retaliation

08/06/2010
One of the most common mistakes employers make is allowing bosses to subtly retaliate. Take, for example, an employee who asks for a religious accommodation. If the request is approved, it may cause scheduling difficulties. Some supervisors may be tempted to get back at the employee for the hassle the accommodations are causing. Don’t let them.

Not all action after complaint is retaliation

08/06/2010
Employees are protected from retaliation for complaining about alleged discrimination. That doesn’t mean, however, that everything negative that happens after a complaint is filed is grounds for a retaliation lawsuit.

Balance need for racial diversity against threat of reverse discrimination lawsuit

08/06/2010
Here’s a problem that isn’t going away anytime soon: Courts often look at the available labor pool when figuring out whether an employer’s hiring practices have a disparate impact on a protected class. If the employer is caught filling informal quotas to create a balanced workforce, members of other protected classes may sue for discrimination.

Fired employee for poor judgment? He may still qualify for unemployment comp

08/06/2010

Employees who are terminated for misconduct aren’t entitled to unemployment compensation. However, what rises to the level of misconduct requires an individualized assessment. In fact, using poor judgment alone isn’t misconduct. Employees who make a mistake are eligible for benefits, and the mistake doesn’t have to be a work mistake.

Remember, ADA disability requires substantial impairment of major life activity

08/06/2010

Some employees think that if they have a learning disability, they are automatically disabled and entitled to an accommodation under the ADA. That’s not necessarily so. Such employees still have to prove that their specific learning disability substantially impairs a major life function, such as learning.

Diagnosis just start of ADA assessment process

08/06/2010

The ADA protects Americans from discrimination based on disability. But to be classified as disabled, employees and applicants have to show that they have more than transient or minor problems. Even a diagnosis is only a starting point since different conditions affect people in varied ways. Each individual is assessed based on his or her unique situation to see whether the condition underlying a diagnosis substantially impairs a major life function when compared to the average person.