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

Terminations

Layoffs looming? OK to consider training participation when deciding who goes

10/15/2010

Like other employers, your organization probably is trying to use employees as efficiently as possible. That may include eliminating some jobs and training employees to pick up additional tasks. You may want to consider creating a cross-training program before deciding which employees to terminate. Those who show a willingness to learn new skills and the ability to perform them well are probably the “keepers” on your staff. Just make sure you offer everyone the same opportunity to learn.

Collect ample evidence of wrongdoing before firing military vet covered by USERRA

10/15/2010

USERRA provides returning soldiers, sailors and other service personnel with additional employment rights that other employees don’t always enjoy. One of those is the right to remain employed unless fired for just cause. In effect, USERRA temporarily turns what were once at-will employees into employees with job protection.

Fitness-for-duty exams: When can they be used?

10/15/2010
We’ve all tussled with sending employees to fitness-for-duty exams when returning from an injury or illness. When are they the right decision? When do they create liability? As this case shows, it’s best to let the doctor make the right call …

Pinellas uniform company to try on age-bias suit

10/13/2010

Fifteen former employees of a Pinellas uniform company have filed suit against the company, claiming its latest rounds of job cuts violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. In a combination of outsourcing and downsizing, Superior Uniform shipped some jobs to El Salvador and eliminated positions at its plant in Seminole.

Good-faith treatment for all is good policy, and good protection against lawsuits, too

10/12/2010

Employees who claim they have been discriminated against typically have to show that their employers singled them out for poor treatment because of a protected characteristic. It’s easy for employers to counter that if they can show they always act in good faith. The best way to do that is to apply the rules equally to every employee.

Handle firing with care if employee has complained about alleged corporate wrongdoing

10/12/2010

Employers that want to terminate employees who have complained about pressure to engage in criminal activity must make sure the termination process is flawless. It’s especially important to be able to articulate in very concrete terms an underlying, legitimate reason for the firing—one that can’t be mistaken as a pretext for getting rid of a troublemaker.

Firing new mother? Better have a good reason

10/12/2010

Terminating someone who is pregnant or who just gave birth can be dangerous. If you must fire her, make sure you can provide clear and consistent reasons. Tell supervisors they should never make comments that sound as if the real reason is pregnancy.

Federal court makes it tougher for employees to prove retaliation

10/12/2010

Federal courts often use the well-known McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting test to determine whether an employer has unlawfully discriminated against an employee. Now the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that when it considers an Illinois workers’ compensation retaliation claim, it must apply an Illinois state law rule that is more demanding for employees than the McDonnell Douglas test.

Remember: You must consider chronic conditions when employees request FMLA leave

10/12/2010
Employers sometimes mistakenly focus only on the FMLA provision that defines a serious health condition as one that incapacitates an employee for three calendar days or more. Don’t focus solely on illnesses of three days’ duration. If the employee has a brief flare-up of an underlying condition that has been treated in the past, he may be eligible for FMLA leave.

Feel free to set generous FMLA notice terms, but rely on the law if you wind up in court

10/12/2010
Some employers cut more slack than the FMLA requires when employees fail to give timely notice that they want to take FMLA leave. The company typically might send an employee a letter informing her that, since she didn’t show up for her last scheduled shift or offered an explanation, she has five days to return or explain why she can’t work. If the reason is one covered by the FMLA, she may already have lost the right to claim FMLA leave.