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

HR Management

NLRB, EEOC confidentiality stance muddles investigations

08/26/2013

The NLRB and EEOC are actively enforcing the position that a blanket policy requiring confidentiality during investigations violates federal labor and employment law. That means employers must proceed carefully and thoughtfully when making confidentiality requests during investigations.

Balance the pluses and minuses of switching to PTO banks

08/26/2013
Some employers have retooled the traditional method of setting paid time off in separate categories by folding vacation, personal or sick leave entitlements into one “bank.”  So-called paid time off (PTO) programs offer benefits for employers and employees alike, but there are some potential pitfalls if you are not careful.

Diversity: It’s not just an HR function anymore

08/26/2013
Organization-wide diversity can’t just be the diversity professional’s job or the HR manager’s responsibility. It requires true partnership and participation across functional areas to align efforts that support a shared vision for diversity and inclusion.

Fashion tip for the fall season: Don’t tolerate teasing about clothing

08/22/2013
Here’s a warning for your super­­visors and managers: If an em­­ployee complains that other em­­ployees are making fun of his wardrobe choices or other manner of dressing, act fast to stop the teasing.

Can we fire admitted drug user, or should we offer time off for treatment?

08/20/2013
Q. We have an employee who has been performing poorly and who has shown up for work appearing to be intoxicated. In a discussion with a manager, the employee admitted that he was currently using cocaine and it was affecting his personal and work life. We haven’t done a drug test on the employee, given his admission of drug use. We want to fire the employee, but we aren’t sure if the FMLA or any other law requires us to give him time off to undergo treatment?

Employers win Nassar battle, but retaliation war continues

08/20/2013
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar that, to win a retaliation lawsuit, an employee must show the employer’s intent to retaliate against the employee for exercising Title VII anti-discrimination rights was the “but for” cause of the challenged action, not just a motivating factor. As important a victory as the Nassar ruling was for employers, it’s important to recognize that the retaliation war is ongoing.

Truth is, a handbook needs an honesty policy

08/20/2013

Nearly one in five U.S. workers admit to lying at the office at least once a week, according to a CareerBuilder survey. A quarter of hiring managers say they’ve fired an em­­ployee for being dishonest. In such cases, it’s much easier to discipline and terminate an employee when you have a general honesty, ethics or misrepresentation clause in your employee handbook.

Can we ask employees about retirement intentions?

08/19/2013
Q. Is it OK to ask members of our management team what their tentative retirement plans are so we can focus on having enough trained people ready to step up when vacancies occur? 

College graduates are the least engaged at work

08/15/2013
According to a recent Gallup poll, only 28.3% of college graduates believe “at work I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day.”

Supreme Court rejects EEOC’s broad definition of ‘supervisor’

08/13/2013
In a major victory for employers, the Supreme Court in June ruled that, in Title VII cases, only someone with the power to take “tangible employment action” can be considered a supervisor. The Court’s decision in Vance v. Ball State will make it harder for employees to sue for supervisor bias, a claim that carries strict employer liability.