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

Employment Law

Keep hiring as objective as possible — and beware loose criteria that could let in bias

06/09/2010

At some point, an unsuccessful job candidate may challenge your decision not to hire him. Then you will have to justify your selection process. The more objective criteria you use, the more likely a court will agree not to second-guess your decision. But if you add subjective elements to the process, you may end up being charged with discrimination.

No STD documentation? OK to discipline–or fire

06/09/2010

If you offer short-term disability (STD) benefits for employees who can’t work because of illness, you probably insist on medical documentation. If the employee doesn’t provide that information within the reasonable timeline your STD plan requires, you can count the absence against the employee and terminate her.

MHRA: Court clarifies what’s marital bias

06/09/2010
The Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) makes it an unfair employment practice to terminate an employee based on marital status. The Court of Appeals of Minnesota has now clarified that the law covers more than the state of being married; it also bans discrimination based on who one’s spouse is.

Is our policy on criminal records legal?

06/09/2010
Q. We currently have a policy against the hiring of anyone with a felony conviction. Can you shed some light on whether this policy is legal?

What legal issues should we weigh before allowing employees to bring their pets to work

06/09/2010
Q. We run a pretty laid-back office and are considering allowing employees to bring their pets to work. Anything we should be thinking about?

What are the legal risks of not paying interns?

06/09/2010
Q. For years, we have used student interns during the summer months. Because they are interns, we do not pay for their services. Is this legal?

Consider alternatives before choosing mandatory arbitration

06/09/2010

Employers and their lawyers often favor mandatory arbitration of employment claims for two reasons: It’s a cost-effective alternative to court, and it’s an insurance policy against runaway jury verdicts. Arbitration, however, can often prove just as costly as court. Thus, while many employers continue to favor arbitration to limit their potential exposure in front of a jury, others have begun to consider alternatives.

EEOC wrings $500,000 out of Everdry in harassment settlement

06/09/2010
Cincinnati-based Everdry Marketing and Management, a waterproofing firm, has paid more than $500,000 to satisfy a judgment won by a group of 13 women who filed sexual harassment claims against the company.

Prepare business case to justify job cuts

06/09/2010

Courts understand reductions in force and recognize that companies sometimes have to make tough decisions. When an employer can show it had good reasons for cutting employees through a RIF, affected employees will have to come up with solid discrimination evidence early in the litigation game.

Aggressively defend against even the flimsiest lawsuits

06/09/2010
Employees who lose their jobs often think the reason just has to be discrimination. Their first stop after receiving their pink slips: a lawyer’s office. If the resulting lawsuit is meritless, push hard for dismissal.