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

Testing

Hiring bias costs Dallas defense contractor $1.5 million

05/30/2008
Defense contractor Vought Aircraft recently agreed to pay $1.5 million to settle a discrimination lawsuit brought by more than 1,000 job applicants. The settlement comes as a result of charges brought by the DOL that the aircraft parts manufacturer discriminated against minorities and women in hiring …

Pre-Employment tests: Do yours meet the new EEOC guidelines?

05/15/2008
In December, the EEOC issued new guidance on employment tests and selection procedures under three laws: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The key to complying is to make sure each employment test is directly job-related and focuses on business necessity …

Congress OKs New Genetic Bias Law—What’s it Mean for HR?

05/06/2008
Congress just passed the nation’s first federal law prohibiting employers and insurance companies from discriminating against individuals on the basis of genetic information, a protection critics have called “a remedy in search of a problem.” Find out what the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act prohibits, and why some believe it could cause trouble for employers.

Use business necessity as rationale for pre-Employment exams

05/05/2008
Does your hiring process build in safeguards to prevent inadvertent disability discrimination? If you’re unsure, follow these guidelines for setting up the right process …

Justify drug testing program with business-Related rationale

04/18/2008
Many government employers ask applicants to submit to drug testing before beginning work. A recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling may make employers rethink that strategy and prepare to clearly articulate a business-related reason for drug tests. A blanket testing policy may spell trouble …

Drug testing after a workplace accident

04/01/2008
Q. Last week, one of our employees drove a piece of equipment into a shelving unit. The employee caused substantial damage to the equipment and the products on the shelves. He could have seriously injured a co-worker. The employee’s supervisor reported that the employee’s eyes were glassy and bloodshot. Can we require the employee to submit to a drug test? — S.S., White Bear Lake …

The EEOC’s new initiatives for 2008: All talk … or a real threat?

04/01/2008
In recent months, the EEOC has made a lot of noise about new initiatives to combat workplace discrimination. Three of the most prominent include (1) the E-RACE Initiative, (2) employment testing and (3) protections for caregivers … 

Who pays for pre-Employment medical exams?

04/01/2008
Q. We require new employees to undergo pre-employment medical exams. May we require a new employee to cover the cost of the exam? We have 35 employees …

Results of this test: Auto industry to pay $1.6 mil

03/01/2008

The courts look unfavorably on literacy tests for positions that don’t directly require writing skills, as seen by a recent U.S. District Court decision for the Southern District of Ohio. The court awarded $1.6 million to 700 black workers who were screened out of apprenticeship programs at Ford Motor Company, Visteon Corp. and Automotive Components Holdings …

No need to accommodate Rx marijuana use

03/01/2008
The California Supreme Court has ruled that an employer doesn’t have to accommodate an employee’s marijuana use even though he had a valid prescription. Employers can and should continue to use post-offer, pre-employment drug tests if having a work force free of impairment is an important safety consideration …