Friday, September 15, 2017

WIRTW #476 (the “… punk rocker” edition)


Genetics is a funny thing. We have no idea where Norah got her musical chops, as neither my wife nor I are anywhere close to what one would call musical.

Consider this, however. Joey Ramone’s real name was Jeffrey Hyman. Could this be the source of Norah’s musical chops (and her height)?

My dad says not to count on it. I’m holding out hope.

Norah will be doing her punk thing this Sunday and next Saturday at Slim and Chubby’s, 5 pm and 3 pm, respectfully. D-man precedes her at 3 pm (Sunday) and 1 pm (next Saturday) playing some Beatles tunes. 

Here’s what I read this week:

Discrimination

HR & Employee Relations

Thursday, September 14, 2017

The more things change … the NLRB and Weingarten rights for non-union employees


Today, a joke.

“How is the National Labor Relations Board like the weather?”

“I don’t know, Jon, how?”

“If you don’t like either, just wait and they’ll change.”

[groan]

Not my best material, I know. But, it does illustrate an important point, driven home by an Advice Memo [pdf] just released by the NLRB Office of General Counsel on the issue of Weingarten rights for non-union employees.

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

The 18th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the pumping preventer


The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a six-figure verdict in favor of a Stephanie Hicks, a former narcotics task force investigator for the Tuscaloosa, Alabama, police department. She sued, and won, after her former employer refused to permit her to pump her breast milk after returning from maternity leave.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

A refresher on pre-employment medical examinations


Do you require medical exams of applicants before they start working for you? If so, do you know the rules that the ADA requires you follow?

Last month, the EEOC settled a lawsuit it brought against a Florida staffing firm for alleged unlawful pre-employment medical exams under the ADA, which serves as a good reminder for employers of these rules.

Monday, September 11, 2017

Where is the line between lawful (but awful) bullying and unlawful harassment?


Consider the following allegations of sexual harassment levied by Pamela Daniels, a secretary in the Pike County Prosecutor’s Office, against her boss, County Prosecutor Charles Robert Junk.

And then let’s answer the age-old question—lawful (but awful) bullying or unlawful harassment?

Friday, September 8, 2017

WIRTW #475 (the “girls rock” edition)


I’m not sure why, but when I pictured having a daughter I always imagined that she’d be into and frilly things, Barbies, and ballet. I guess it’s because it’s “what girls do”? This is so not Norah. She is a rock ‘n’ roll chick. She loves punk music, flannel shirts, the color black, and her telecaster. And I could not be more proud of her.

And she’s also a girl, playing in what has predominantly been a male dominated space. She’s even newly fronting a band of four guys (stay tuned, more on this exciting news in the coming weeks).

Thankfully, she’s always had really strong female role models at School of Rock (thank you Quinn, Erin, Kayleigh, Maddie, and Taylor). I’m also always on the lookout for new female-led bands for her to check out. That’s how we discovered Diet Cig, for example, and I recently discovered The Regrettes (fronted by a 16-year-old, another band worthy of your attention).

For these reasons, a story the New York Times ran last week caught my eye. Rock’s Not Dead, It’s Ruled by Women is a roundtable discussion with 8 women rockers, including Alex Luciano from the aforementioned Diet Cig, Shawna Potter of War on Women (one of Norah’s recent discoveries, thanks to her SoR Punk show), and Sadie Dupuis of Speedy Ortiz. They discuss their role as women working in a male dominated industry, their responsibility as role models, and how gender-based stereotypes still dominate and resonate.

It’s a great read.

As for my 11-year-old rocker (and her 9-year-old brother), they have shows coming up in the next two weeks:
  • Sept. 17, Donovan does The Beatles at 3 pm, and Norah does punk at 5 pm.
  • Sept. 23, Donovan re-does The Beatles at 1 pm, and Norah the punk thing at 3 pm.
All shows are at Slim & Chubby’s, 12492 Prospect Rd., Strongsville.

Here’s what else I read this week:

Thursday, September 7, 2017

Baring it all on social media and hiring


I’ve never written about the time I stripped naked in front of my entire law school … until now.

Well, here we go.

Wednesday, September 6, 2017

Dads are parents, too — baby bonding and sex discrimination


Should new dad’s receive the same amount of time off from work to bond with their newly born child as do women? That is the question at the center of a lawsuit the EEOC recently filed against cosmetics giant Estée Lauder.

Tuesday, September 5, 2017

Is the DOL’s white-collar salary test DOA?


Late last week, a federal judge in Texas struck down the Department of Labor’s attempt to raise the salary test for the Fair Labor Standards Act’s white-collar exemptions from $455 per week to $913 per week.

The court held that because the statute defines the administrative, executive, and professional exemptions based on their duties, any salary test that renders the duties irrelevant to the analysis is invalid. Thus, because the Obama-era $913 salary test could overshadow the exemption’s duties in the execution of the exemptions, the new salary level is invalid.

I founds footnotes 5 and 6 to be very interesting, but I’m not sure the position they advance are intellectually consistent with the bulk of the opinion.

Compare:
This opinion is not making any assessments regarding the general lawfulness of the salary-level test or the Department’s authority to implement such a test. Instead, the Court is evaluating only the salary-level test as amended by the Department’s Final Rule. ... During questioning at the preliminary injunction hearing, the Court suggested it would be permissible if the Department adjusted the 2004 salary level for inflation. [fns. 5 and 6]
-vs-
The Final Rule more than doubles the previous minimum salary level. By raising the salary level in this manner, the Department effectively eliminates a consideration of whether an employee performs “bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity” duties. ... Nothing in Section 213(a)(1) allows the Department to make salary rather than an employee’s duties determinative of whether a “bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity” employee should be exempt from overtime pay. [opinion]

To me, the only way to read the opinion is that any salary test exceeds the DOL’s authority to implement the EAP exemptions (fns. 5 and 6 notwithstanding). Alternatively, if the only salary test that will pass muster is one that is so low that anyone who meets the duties test also must, de facto, meet the minimum salary threshold (the status quo of $455, adjusted for inflation to $592), why have a salary test at all?

Thus, in the opinion of this blogger, the DOL’s salary test is DOA. Now, let’s wait for the appeal and see what the court of appeals has to say on this issue.

Friday, September 1, 2017

WIRTW #474 (the “I’m from” edition)


My 11 year old daughter is a unique soul. She’s always been older and wiser than her years suggest, but I don’t think I’ve ever appreciated exactly how much older or wiser until I read her “I’m from” poem.

She just entered 6th grade, and this poem was her first ever middle-school assignment. This year's language arts curriculum is focused around the idea of identity. Her assignment was to craft a poem defining her own personal identity—where she’s from.

The result floored me. I cried real tears. Not just out of joy that my 11-year-old could produce something of such beauty, but that this beauty reflects a deep understanding of who she is.


So perfectly Norah.

Here’s what else I read this week.

Thursday, August 31, 2017

BREAKING: federal judge strikes down FLSA white-collar exemption salary test


Ding, dong, the DOL’s salary test for white collar exemptions is dead (sort of).

A Texas federal judge has held that the Department of Labor improperly used a salary-level test to determine which white-collar workers are exempt from overtime compensation.

That time Justin Bieber’s “L’il Biebers” caused a sex discrimination lawsuit


File this one under the category of I can’t make this stuff up. Apparently, Justin Bieber’s testicles are at the center of a recently filed sex discrimination lawsuit.

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

The 17th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the square non-sparer


A female public relations exec is suing her former employer for sex discrimination. Her claim—that her male bosses limited her access to toilet paper the bathroom because, as a female, she used more than her male counterparts, and was fired after she complained about the discrimination.

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

An attendance love story


14 years ago today, my wife and I married.

The ceremony started at 11 am, and by 10:55 I was nervous. Not your normal, “I’m about to get married,” nervous, but the, “What the hell, we start in 5 minutes and my bride-to-be isn’t here yet” nervous. It was 2003, before the prevalence of iPhones. Without a cell phone on me, I just had to take it on faith that Colleen was on her way. Nevertheless, I was most definitely jittery.

Monday, August 28, 2017

Letter to employees during EEOC investigation may violate discrimination laws


Suppose an employee files an EEOC charge of discrimination against you. And, further suppose that during the investigation, you receive a request from the agency for the name and contact information for all similarly situated employees. You correctly assume at the EEOC may use the information to contact your employees for investigatory interviews.

Do you—
  1. Allow the EEOC process to proceed; or
  2. Inform your employees of the nature of the charge, the EEOC investigation, that the EEOC may contact them, and that their participation would be 100 percent voluntary?
If you choose option “2”, you may have violated federal discrimination laws, at least according to a Connecticut federal judge.

Friday, August 25, 2017

WIRTW #473 (the “sweet children” edition)


Last week I offered by eight-word meaning of life: Be kind to others and do good things.

Today, I further offer “Corollary One” to said meaning of life: And do all you do with joy.

Earlier this week, I took my family to see Green Day (easily the best arena concert I’ve ever attended). Yet, as good as Green Day was (and they really were that good), my personal highlight was looking right to bear witness to how much pure fun Norah was having. This is what pure joy looks like.

A post shared by Jon Hyman (@jonhyman) on

Here’s what I read this week:

Thursday, August 24, 2017

The 16th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the rapid retaliator


The EEOC has sued an Atlanta cemetery company for firing an employee the day after the agency interviewed her as part of an on-going investigation.

Wednesday, August 23, 2017

NLRB offers rare win for employer confidentiality policy


It’s been a rough few years for workplace policies at the NLRB. From communication policies, to social media policies, to conduct policies, to confidentiality policies, the NLRB has, time and again, struck down facially neutral, garden variety employer policies as overly restrictive of employees’ section 7 rights to engage in protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act.

Employer wins on this issue have been few and far between. As a result, when we get a win, it’s reason to celebrate. Well, employers, pop those champagne corks, because earlier this week, in Macy’s, Inc. [pdf], we received just such a win.

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

The 15th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the one-day leave denier


According to a lawsuit the EEOC recently filed against Macy’s, Inc., the retailer allegedly violated the ADA by firing an employee instead of granting her a one-day absence for a medical emergency.

Monday, August 21, 2017

A deep dive on social media, employee privacy, and the workplace


When history closes its book on 21st century America, Charlottesville may go down as one of its most significant chapters. If justice has any place in our world, it will prove to be a turning point on race relations in our nation. Or at least that is my hope. In the wake of this tragedy, journalists have spilled, and will continue to spill, a lot of ink.

One of the favorite articles I read in the past week was, Can an employee be fired for activities outside the workplace?, by Kathryn Moody at HRDive.com (and not just because the article is an interview with me; thanks to Kathryn for the interview). 

Friday, August 18, 2017

WIRTW #472 (the “back to school” edition)


A post shared by Jon Hyman (@jonhyman) on

Here’s what I read this week:

Thursday, August 17, 2017

The meaning of life (in eight words)


A few months back, while riding in the car (we do a lot of riding in the car, mostly to and from music lessons, rehearsals, and gigs), I fielded a question from the back seat. I don’t recall the context of the conversation, or the genesis of the question that followed.

Norah asked, “What’s the meaning of life?”

Pretty deep for a then 10-year-old.

I paused, thought for a second (or three), and answered.

Wednesday, August 16, 2017

How much wasted work-time is too much?


According to a recent survey conducted by OfficeTeam, on average, employees spend 8 hours per workweek on non-work activities.

What does this non-work time look like?

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Does a LinkedIn request violate a non-solicitation agreement?


In Bankers Life and Casualty Company v. American Senior Benefits (Ill. Ct. App. 8/7/17), Bankers Life sued a former sales manager, Gregory Gelineau, for violating the following non-solicitation agreement after he jumped ship to American Senior Benefits, a competitor:
During the term of this Contract and for 24 months thereafter, within the territory regularly serviced by the Manager’s branch sales office, the Manager shall not, personally or through the efforts of others, induce or attempt to induce: 
(a) any agent, branch sales manager, field vice president, employee, consultant, or other similar representative of the Company to curtail, resign, or sever a relationship with the company; [or]
(b) any agent, branch sales manager, field vice president or employee of the Company to contract with or sell insurance business with any company not affiliated with the company. 

Monday, August 14, 2017

When you discover that you employ a Nazi


In the wake of Friday and Saturday’s horrific, evil events in Charlottesville, the twitter account YesYoureRacist posted many riot photos and identified many of the rioters. And, as a result, some have lost their jobs.


Question: Does one participating in a Nazi rally enjoy any job protections from said participation?

Friday, August 11, 2017

WIRTW #471 (the “free press … sort of” edition)



Thursday, August 10, 2017

Apparently the labor rights of strikers trump the non-harassment rights of employees


There exists only one workplace environment in which a white employee can keep his job after yelling the following at a group of African-American employees.
  • “Hey, did you bring enough KFC for everyone?” 
  • “Go back to Africa, you bunch of f***ing losers.”
  • “Hey anybody smell that? I smell fried chicken and watermelon.”
A gold star for you if you answered a picket line, when the comments are made by striking workers and are directed at a group of replacements crossing said picket line. Or at least this is the majority finding of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. NLRB [pdf].

Wednesday, August 9, 2017

Diversity is not an ideology


By now, you’ve likely heard about the male Google employee (James Damore) who circulated within the company a 10-page memo entitled, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” In this memo, he critiqued Google’s efforts at maintaining gender diversity within the ranks of its employees, arguing that women are underrepresented in tech not because of workplaces biases and discrimination, but because of inherent psychological differences between the sexes.

Tuesday, August 8, 2017

Avoid “FLSA roshambo” to win off-the-clock overtime claims


Defending claims for off-the-clock work is one of the most difficult tasks employers face under the Fair Labor Standards Act. An employee (or worse, group of employees) says, “I (we) worked, without compensation, before our shift, after our shift, or during our lunch; pay me (us).” Often, these employees have their own personal, detailed logs supporting their claims. And the employer has bupkis. It then must prove a negative (“You weren’t really working when you say you were”), which places the employer in a difficult and often unwinnable position. It’s a wage-and-hour game of rock-paper-scissors, where paper always beats air.

When we last examined Allen v. City of Chicago—a case in which a class of Chicago police officers claimed their employer owed them unpaid overtime for their time spent reading emails off-duty on their smartphones—an Illinois federal court had dismissed the claims, holding that most of the emails were incidental and non-essential to the officers’ work, and, regardless, the employer lacked specific knowledge of non-compensated off-duty work.

Last week—in what is believed to be the first, and only, federal appellate court decision on whether an employer owes non-exempt employees overtime for time spent off-duty reading emails on a smartphone—the 7th Circuit affirmed [pdf].

Monday, August 7, 2017

Listen to me on the Talent10x podcast discuss the current state of LGBTQ discrimination


I have enjoyed a long and fruitful relationship with Workforce Magazine. I’ve been blogging at workforce.com for the past five-plus years. I write a monthly column for the magzine. And, I serve on its editorial advisory board. Now, you can also add “podcaster” to my Workforce CV.

Friday, August 4, 2017

WIRTW #470 (the “lot was rocked" edition)




’Nuff said.

Here’s what I read this week:

Thursday, August 3, 2017

Would you let your employer microchip you?


Our family dog, Loula, is microchipped. Our vet offered it to us as a service when Loula first joined our family. It provides some peace of mind in the sad event that Loula goes missing and ends up in a shelter or vet office. They would be able to read the rice-grain RFID chip embedded in her leg, discover that she belonged to us, and return her.


Loula, however, is a dog, she’s not an employee. Which is why I’m troubled that a Wisconsin employer has decided to offer microchip implants as a “service” to its employees.

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

Is joint employment the issue that unites our divided government?


I cannot recall a time when our government has been more divided across ideological and party lines. (I don’t count the early 1860s, because that’s not a time a can remember.) Thankfully, an issue has come along to build a peace bridge over the streets and through the halls of Washington D.C.

This issue—joint employment, via the Save Local Business Act [pdf], which clarifies that two or more employers must have “actual, direct, and immediate” control over employees to be considered joint employers.

Tuesday, August 1, 2017

NBC reignites privacy debate by requiring social-media passwords of job applicants


“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”  (George Santayana)
It’s been eight long years since Bozeman, Montana, set the internet on fire by requiring that job applicants for municipal positions turn over passwords to their personal social media accounts as part of the application process. In the wake of that story, states rushed to introduce legislation prohibiting this practice; many succeeded. And, the story more or less died.

Thank you, NBC, for reigniting it.

Monday, July 31, 2017

Justice Department takes a stand in favor of LGBTQ discrimination


LGBTQ prohibitions continue to make headway in the courts. While Congress has remained silent on the issue, more and more state and federal courts hold that the law’s existing prohibitions against sex discrimination implicitly cover sexual orientation and other forms of LGBTQ discrimination.

The latest appellate court to take up this issue in the 2nd Circuit, in Zarda v. Altitude Express. Just last week, the Department of Justice filed its amicus brief [pdf] in this case. Yet, in that brief, the DOJ argued that Title VII’s prohibition against sexual stereotyping as sex discrimination does not include LGBTQ discrimination. This position advanced by the DOJ is contrary to that already espoused by the 7th Circuit, many district courts, and the EEOC.

Friday, July 28, 2017

WIRTW #469 (the “rock the lot” edition)


Do you like beautiful Ohio summer sunshine, delicious food-truck cuisine, and sweet rock ‘n’ roll music?

If you answer “who doesn’t,” “yum,” and “bring it,” then you need to be at 16888 Pearl Road this Sunday from 1 – 3(ish) pm. That is when School of Rock Strongsville will hold its annual “Rock the Lot” show, during which Norah (punk) and Donovan (Beatles) will play some of their aforementioned sweet music.

Here’s what I read this week:

Thursday, July 27, 2017

Treat harassment by non-employees no differently than harassment by employees


Consider the following lawsuit the EEOC filed against a California senior-care provider:
The civil rights agency found that Rashon Sturdivant, an experienced care provider, faced daily harassment, including racially offensive remarks about “brown sugar” and “black butts,” requests to perform sexual acts, and lewd comments about her body. The client also masturbated in front of her and groped her when she performed routine tasks like helping him sit up in bed or cleaning him. Although Sturdivant and other care providers informed R. MacArthur of his conduct, the EEOC charges that the employer failed to act on these complaints and also retaliated against Sturdivant by refusing to reassign her to another client.

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

The 14th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the horny head of HR


The 14th nominee for the worst employer of 2017, on which you'll be be voting at year's end, is perhaps the worst HR exec ever. If she's not the worst, she's at least the most libidinous.

Tuesday, July 25, 2017

OSHA, what say you about Michael Phelps vs. Shark?


This week is Shark Week on the Discovery Channel. And the marquee event of this year's Shark Week was Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps "racing" a great white shark. I say "racing" because Phelps did not race an actual shark. Instead, he swam against a CGI shark based on a previously recorded shark. To create the CGI, the show had to record a shark swimming in a straight line for a pre-determined distance. And, since great white sharks are not known for their trainability, the job to lure the straight-line swim fell to this guy.


Monday, July 24, 2017

Court rules that religious accommodation request is not protected activity for retaliation claim


A Minnesota federal court has ruled that an employee’s request for a religious accommodation did not qualify as protected activity to support the employee’s retaliation claim. EEOC v. North Memorial Health Care (D. Minn. 7/6/17) involves a hospital that withdrew a conditional job offer to a nurse after she disclosed that she was a Seventh Day Adventist and could not work Friday nights because of her religion.

Friday, July 21, 2017

WIRTW #468 (the “big in Japan” edition)


True story. While trekking between San Francisco’s Coit Tower and Lombard Street, we passed a group of Japanese tourists exiting their bus. One of girls, wearing a striped shirt sort of similar to Norah’s striped dress, asked if she could take a selfie with Norah. A little Puzzled and very curious, my wife asked, “Is it because you’re both wearing stripes?” “No,” she replied, “It’s because she’s so pretty.”

Somewhere in Japan, Norah has a fan club of a half-dozen girls, all with Norah selfies on their phones.


While I’m on the subject of Miss Norah, she has some pretty cool gigs coming up over the next two weeks.

Here’s what I read this week:

Thursday, July 20, 2017

This is what the interactive process is supposed to look like


Last week, Donovan turned 9. Since we were in California during his birthday, we’ve had a bit of a delayed celebration back home. Since D-man has Celiac Disease and cannot eat anything with any gluten, he wanted an ice cream birthday cake. For him, however, ice cream can be tricky. Even if the ice cream itself contains zero gluten in its ingredients, it can still make him ill if it becomes cross-contaminated.

Wednesday, July 19, 2017

The (high) times they are a changin’: medical marijuana and disability discrimination


In what is believed to be the first decision of its kind, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has allowed an employee to pursue a disability discrimination claim based on the use of medical marijuana.

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

A reminder that any employee can sue you at any time


Another obvious lesson
Today’s lesson may seem obvious, but it is one worth repeating: any employee, no matter the on-the-job misconduct, can sue you. Filing a lawsuit is one thing, succeeding on that lawsuit is an entirely different animal.

Case in point: Robinson v. Klosterman Baking Co. (S.D. Ohio 7/5/17).

Monday, July 17, 2017

What I learned on my summer vacation


Saturday evening my family and I returned from our two-week California vacation. Five nights in Los Angeles, two in Paso Robles (if you ever pass through, I cannot more highly recommend Sculpterra Winery and the Paso Robles Inn), three in Palo Alto (where Donovan participated in a research study seeking a link between Noonan Syndrome and ADHD, and which resulted in both of my kids now wanting to attend Stanford … best of luck to them and me), and three in San Francisco. We had epic adventures, experienced Disney (of course), hiked and biked, enjoyed beautiful scenery, reunited with family and friends, and walked … a lot (72 miles to be precise).


We also learned one valuable HR lesson.

Friday, June 30, 2017

WIRTW #467 (the “here we are now, entertain us” edition)


Last Saturday, Norah’s band, the Major Minors, played to a packed courtyard outside the legendary Grog Shop. And boy did the crowd have a good time. Especially this woman.


The Major Minors return to the scene on August 3rd, where they’ll play inside the Grog Shop, opening for the School of Rock Allstars (the school’s national touring band).



The blog is going on hiatus for two weeks. I’ll be back on July 17 after a much deserved vacation.



Here’s what I read this week.

Thursday, June 29, 2017

Ohio looks to put enforcement muscle behind workplace concealed carry law


It’s been six months since Ohio made it illegal for employers to prohibit employees (or anyone else for that matter) from storing a firearm in their vehicles on the employer’s property. This law, however, lacks any specific statutory teeth (sort of). If Ohio legislators get their way, this omission will soon change.


Wednesday, June 28, 2017

More on why holding lawyers liable for retaliation to a client's employee is the worst idea


Yesterday’s post discussing Arias v. Raimondo as the worst employment-law decision of 2017 was way more controversial than I imagined. To me, it’s a no-brainer. It’s dangerous for courts to hold an employer’s lawyer liable for retaliation against the employees of the lawyer’s client. It will chill an attorney’s ability to give proper advice to one’s client, because anything that remotely could result in an employee suffering an adverse action could, under the logic of Arias, give rise to a retaliation claim. Then the comments rolled in:

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Is this the worst employment law decision of 2017?


I’ll be vacationing in California with my family the first two week of July. After reading the 9th Circuit’s decision in Arias v. Raimondo—holding an employer’s attorney for liable for FLSA retaliation against his client’s employee because the employee sued his client for unpaid overtime—I’m thinking of adding the 9th Circuit to my list of tourist stops in San Francisco to see if courthouse resembles a Salvador Dali painting. Because this decision is flat out bonkers.

Monday, June 26, 2017

The 13th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the racist boss


I couldn’t describe the 13th nominee for the worst employer of 2017 any better than CNN did in its story about this (alleged) peach of a boss:

Friday, June 23, 2017

WIRTW #466 (the “solo” edition)


I gotta give my girl credit. She’s got cohones (especially at the age of 11). Through a casual exam-chair conversation with her orthodontist, he learned that she plays music and she learned that he’s involved with an annual summer solstice music festival. From that, she booked herself her first ever solo gig. She spent the next day working up and running through six songs, and played to a mid-afternoon crowd outside our favorite French restaurant. And, like always, she was aces. Here a few highlights strung together medley-style.


And, if you’re local and crave the full band experience, the Major Minors play a full set from 1-3 tomorrow, during the Coventry Village Sidewalk Sale & Carnival Games Party (one of Cleveland.com’s “Top things to do in Cleveland this weekend.” They will rock the courtyard outside of the Grog Shop, 2785 Euclid Heights Blvd., Cleveland Heights (coincidentally, a mere block from my law school apartment).


Thursday, June 22, 2017

Reporting harassment down is no trigger for employer action, says 6th Circuit


Employers have a legal obligation to investigate known sexual and other unlawful harassment, and exercise reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any unlawfully harassing behavior. When in harassment “known” by an employer such that it triggers this obligation? EEOC v. AutoZone (6th Cir. 6/9/17) offers some key guidance when an employee fails to report harassment up the chain of command per her employer’s written harassment policy.

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

6th Circuit grants EEOC broad subpoena powers


The Witch: I’m not a witch! I’m not a witch!
Sir Bedevere: But you are dressed as one
The Witch: *They* dressed me up like this!
Crowd: We didn’t! We didn’t…
The Witch: And this isn’t my nose. It’s a false one.
Sir Bedevere: [lifts up her false nose] Well?
Peasant 1: Well, we did do the nose.
Sir Bedevere: The nose?
Peasant 1: And the hat, but she is a witch!
Crowd: Yeah! Burn her! Burn her! 
Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
How wide of a net is the EEOC entitled to cast when issuing a subpoena for documents during an investigation? According to EEOC v. United Parcel Service, decided earlier this month by the 6th Circuit, the answer is a lot wider than you’d like.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

The 12th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the parental stereotyper


Last week, Derek Rotondo, a dad of two young children, filed a sex discrimination charge with the EEOC against his employer of seven years, J.P. Morgan. Why? I’ll let Derek explain, in a blog he wrote for the ACLU. 

Monday, June 19, 2017

The 11th nominee for the “worst employer of 2017” is … the pregnant pause


The EEOC has taken a judgment of $118,483 against a New jersey debt collection firm in a pregnancy discrimination case. Why? Because the firm rescinded a job offer to a female employee after it learned that she was pregnant. 

That alone, however, will not earn one an employer a nomination for “Worst Employer of 2017.” I’ll let the EEOC explain further:

Friday, June 9, 2017

WIRTW #465 (the “gimme a break” edition)


Next week, I am taking a much needed break, as I will be out of the office. I’ll see everyone back on June 19. Of course, now that I’ve committed not to blog next week, the employment-law poop will certainly hit the fan next week, in which case my blogger OCD will compel me to break my pledge, interrupt my trip, and bring you all the news that’s fit to blog. Either way.

Here’s what I read this week:

Thursday, June 8, 2017

DOL pulls Obama-era guidance on joint employment and independent contractors


The past two years have been busy for the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division. One can directly track a large part of its busy workload to its enlargement of who qualifies as an “employer” under the Fair Labor Standards Act. In 2015, the DOL issued guidance re-defining, and broadening the definition of, who qualifies as an “independent contractor”. And, the following year, the DOL did the same with its definition of “joint employer”.

Alex Acosta, the newly appointed Secretary of Labor, looks to roll back the clock on these interpretations.

Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Next up on the EEOC’s radar: age discrimination


This year, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act turns 50. Which means the law itself has been protected from age discrimination for a decade (rim shot).

To mark the law’s golden anniversary, the EEOC next week will hold a public meeting, “The ADEA @ 50 - More Relevant Than Ever.” According to the EEOC, “The meeting will explore the state of age discrimination in America today and the challenges it poses for the future.”

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

R-E-S-P-E-C-T (just a little bit)


I ain’t gonna do you wrong while you’re gone
Ain’t gonna do you wrong ‘cause I don’t wanna
All I’m askin’
Is for a little respect
– Aretha Franklin, “Respect”
Yesterday, my friend and fellow blogger (with whom I tend to agree most of the time), Suzanne Lucas (aka Evil HR Lady), posted an article about which I could not agree more, Why You Should Rarely Fight an Unemployment Claim.

Monday, June 5, 2017

A contrary (and common sense) appellate view on rude employees and the NLRA


It’s been six weeks since I reported on NLRB v. Pier Sixty, in which the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals held that the National Labor Relations Act protected the profanity-laced Facebook rant of a disgruntled employee. I have hoped that Pier Sixty is an aberration. Thankfully, last week the 1st Circuit came along with a well reasoned contrarian view in a case in which the alleged employee misconduct was much less severe.

Friday, June 2, 2017

WIRTW #464 (the “school’s out…” edition)


One of the elements of my kids’ school that I like most is that the curriculum provides many opportunities for public speaking at every grade level. Each of mine had their separate chance to exhibit their comfort in front of crowd during the last week of school.

Thursday, June 1, 2017

The importance of an anti-harassment culture


I came across an interesting article at the Harvard Business Review—The Omissions That Make So Many Sexual Harassment Policies Ineffective. The article starts with a simple question. “If 98% of organizations in the United States have a sexual harassment policy, why does sexual harassment continue to be such a persistent and devastating problem in the American workplace?”