The 8th nominee for the “worst employer of 2018” is … the age discriminator

Today’s nominee for the Worst Employer of 2018 is Seasons 52, a national, Orlando-based restaurant chain.

Last week, it agreed to pay $2.85 million to settle a nationwide class age discrimination lawsuit brought by the EEOC. The lawsuit included significant direct evidence of age discrimination.

WIRTW #504 (the “once bitten, twice shy” edition)

Never in my life did I think that I’d ever attend a biker rally. Yet, three weeks from tomorrow, I’ll be in Sandusky, at Ohio Bike Week.

Why?

I’ll be watching Norah and her bandmates warming up the crowd for 80’s hair band Great White.

If you’re attending, please say hi. I’ll be the one without the motorcycle.

THIS is how you reasonably accommodate a disabled employee

Photo by David Pisnoy on Unsplash

I’ve spent a lot of time over the past 16 months discussing bad employers—those that so mishandled employees that they earned a spot on my list of America’s Worst Employers.

Today, I thought I’d take a look at the brighter side—an employer that handled a tricky employee issue correctly.

5.1 millions reason to keep religion out of your workplace

I’m thinking of starting a religion

“Onionhead” teaches people to direct their emotions in a truthful and compassionate way. It is central to the teachings of the Harnessing Happiness Foundation, a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to emotional knowledge and intelligence, conflict resolution, and life handling skills.

Onionhead is also central to a religious discrimination lawsuit brought by the EEOC against United Health Programs of America and its parent, Cost Containment Group. The aunt of the defendants’ CEO is the creator of Onionhead.

No one should ever have to choose between their children and their job

Three female associates at Morrison & Foerster have filed an alleged $100 million class-action sex discrimination lawsuit against the firm. They claim that their employer “mommy tracks” lawyer moms working at the firm by denying them opportunities for advancement and higher pay.

According to the lawsuit [pdf] (care of the ABA Journal):

Hair discrimination; not a thing

Give me a head with hair, long beautiful hair
Shining, gleaming, steaming, flaxen, waxen
Give me down to there hair, shoulder length or longer
Here, baby, there, momma, everywhere, daddy, daddy
Hair, hair, hair, hair, hair, hair, hair, hair
Flow it, show it, long as God can grow it, my hair

– “Hair”

Friday’s tongue in check post about the beauty of baldness got me thinking about hair and employment law.

Or, more to the point, can an employer run afoul of discrimination laws by making an employment decision based on one’s hairstyle?

WIRTW #503 (the “bald is beautiful” edition)

I need to get something off my chest. An albatross I’ve carried since my teenage years. I’ve been crushed by the weight of success, intelligence, and sheer masculinity.

And now science has finally, and thankfully, provided a rational explanation for my years of pain.

Bald men look more successful, intelligent and masculine — science says 

The 7th nominee for the “worst employer of 2018” is … the pregnancy provoker

Kayla Edwards worked as a cashier for Aramark at its location in Gettysburg National Park.

In February 2017, Edwards became pregnant with her third child.

That’s when her troubles at work began, at least according to Edwards’ lawsuit [pdf] (filed earlier this week in federal court in Pennsylvania).

Nearly half of American workers admit to engaging in workplace revenge

Photo by Avalon_Mists on Pixabay

And every time I scratch my nails
Down someone else’s back I hope you feel it

Alanis Morisette 

Revenge. So natural, and yet so wrong. “Turn the other cheek” is always the preferred practice, and, yet, often life is more “smack you in the cheek” as you turn away.

Even at work.

According to a recent study, 44 percent of workers admit to partaking in some type of workplace revenge.

Maternity leave does not guarantee continued employment

By Grand Parc CC BY 2.0 via Wiki Commons

Michelle Bailey worked in the human resources department of Oakwood Healthcare. During her maternity leave, her immediate supervisor and others assumed her responsibilities, and discovered certain deficiencies in how she performed her job.

Discovery of those deficiencies led the supervisor to review Bailey’s qualifications as set forth in her employment application. That review, in turn, uncovered an application Bailey had submitted for a different position at Oakwood two years earlier. A comparison of Bailey’s two resumés on file lead to the conclusion that Bailey had falsified her later application by exaggerating her prior experience and qualifications.

That discovery, coupled with the performance deficiencies, caused Oakwood to terminate Bailey’s employment upon her return from maternity leave.

DO NOT sacrifice employee safety for productivity

Photo by Milo McDowell on Unsplash

The Verge reports that workers at an Amazon distribution facility are “forced to pee in bottles or forego their bathroom breaks entirely because fulfillment demands are too high.”

While this is horrible, and demeaning, it’s still just employees peeing in bottles. It’s not THAT big of deal? Right?

Wrong.

WIRTW #502 (the “AirTalk” edition)

Earlier this week, the U.S. Senate made history by unanimously changing its rules to permit Senator (and new mom) Tammy Duckworth to bring her newborn onto the Senate floor while she cast votes.

Yesterday, I guested on Los Angles public radio station KPCC’s AirTalk and spoke with Libby Denkmann about what this means for the future of parental leave laws in America, and why we should be ashamed that countries like Iran and Afghanistan do more for their working moms than we do.

Thanks to Libby for the great conversation, and to my friend, Kate Bischoff, for the connection.

You can listen here. The segment starts at 29:50, and my interview starts at 41:30.



Here’s what I read this week:

If you weren’t angry about the fired Saints cheerleader before, you will be now.

Remember Bailey Davis? She’s the New Orleans Saints cheerleader fired for violating the team’s social media policy.

Her offense? This photo, which she posted to her personal Instagram.

She’s already filed a civil rights complaint, and now she’s speaking out about her alleged discriminatory treatment, and discriminatory policies in professional cheerleading in general.

Apparently God is in the restaurant business, at least according to the 6th Circuit

Photo by chuttersnap on Unsplash

It’s been nearly three years since I first reported on the Department of Labor’s wage and hour lawsuit against Akron, Ohio’s, Cathedral Buffet, owned and operated by the Earnest Angley Ministries.

The DOL’s allegations are pretty offensive. Not only did it claim that all of the restaurant’s employees worked for free, it also claimed that the ministry coerced church members into volunteering, telling them they “had an obligation to provide their labor to the Buffet, in service to God, and that a failure to offer their labor to the Buffet … would be the same as failing God;” that Angley “was God’s prophet, and saying ‘no’ to Angley would be tantamount to saying ‘no’ directly to God,” and “‘blaspheming against the Holy Ghost.’”

I abhor the term “wage theft,” and you should too

Photo by Thirteen .J on Unsplash

This past Sunday’s Cleveland Plain Dealer ran a story entitled, Do wage theft laws in Ohio harm or help workers? Notably, it quoted yours truly as the voice of management on this issue (thanks to Olivera Perkins for the interview):

Some business advocates argue with the very term “wage theft.” Jon Hyman, a local lawyer who represents employers, says not every employer cited for wage theft has willingly denied rightful wages.”To me, wage theft is a loaded term,” he said. “It presumes an intent to steal.” 

Must you pay employees for FMLA-related breaks during the work day?

Photo by Liam Stahnke on Unsplash

Last week, the Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division resumed its practice of publishing Opinion Letters. One of the first it published answers an interesting question about the intersection of the FLSA and the FMLA.

Must an employer pay an employee for FMLA-approved breaks taken during the work day?

I’ve taken some journalistic license and paraphrased the questions. The answers, however, are verbatim from the DOL Opinion Letter FLSA2018-19 [pdf].

WIRTW #501 (the “fireflies” edition)

According to a recent study, going to concerts adds years to your life.

If this is true (and who am I to argue with science), then last Thursday should propel me into triple digits.

We went to see our fav, Rhett Miller, who invited Norah to share the stage and duet with him.

I learned 4 things watching Norah:

1. She’s got nerves of steel (which I kind of already knew).
2. Her performance belies her 11 years of age (which is also kind of already knew).
3. She can hold her own with a 30-year veteran of the industry.
4. Thanks to Fake ID, I’m probably on an FBI watchlist.

Thank you Rhett, from Norah (and us, too). You are one of a kind.

Here’s what I read this week:

Anti-harassment anthems

Yesterday, I came across the very cool video for a new Speedy Ortiz song, “Villain.”

The song tackles issue of harassment, assault, and consent.

Rock music has always tackled the important social issues of the times, and #MeToo should be no exception.

The other side of diversity

Photo by Igor Ovsyannykov on Unsplash

Workplace diversity has two sides.

One side says that employers cannot discriminate against minorities. The other says that employers cannot discriminate against non-minorities in favor of minorities.

Some people call this reverse discrimination. I just call it discrimination.

#Me(n)Too

According to the Washington Post, nearly one in five — about 17 percent — of harassment complaints filed with the EEOC come from men.

And many involve same-sex harassment.

Some examples:

Cyclist fired for flipping off Presidential motorcade sues former employer

You may recall Juli Briskman, the biker that flipped the finger to Trump’s passing motorcade, and lost her job after a photo she posted went viral.

Ms. Briskman is not taking her termination lying down. In what appears to be a deep-funded and well-orchestrated campaign, she has filed suit in Virginia state court against her ex-employer.

WIRTW #500 (the “500th” edition)

Photo by Alexas_Fotos, via Pixabay

October 12, 2007. I posted my first ever edition of WIRTW (What I Read This Week). It looked a little different back then.

It’s since morphed into what I hope is a useful weekly resource for employers to find the best labor and employment blog posts each week.

Also, holy heck! Ten and a half years and 499 installments later! Who’d have thunk it‽

Thank to everyone for reading along all these weeks and year, and to the other great bloggers who’ve published content that I’ve shared. I literally could not write this column without y’all.

Here’s this week’s list of what I read this week:

In the era of #metoo, let’s not lose focus on the “me”s other than sex

Photo by Luke Braswell on Unsplash

We’ve all done a lot of talking over the past six months about sexual harassment. We should not forget, however, that our laws make harassment unlawful if it’s based on membership in any protected class.

A federal jury in Detroit just provided employers a very real reminder of this fact.

It tagged Ford Motor Co. with a $16.8 million verdict. The plaintiff, a former Ford engineer, proved that the automaker created a hostile work environment based his Arab background.

Does your company need an Affirmative Action Plan?

Photo by Tirachard Kumtanom from Pexels

Compliance is a tricky beast, especially when you don’t know what laws your organization is supposed to be complying with.

Thus, every now and again it’s worthwhile to take a topic and break it down to it’s most basic level. Today is one of those days, and the topic is Affirmative Action Plans. 

As in, do you even know if your organization needs one?

It’s as simple as answering these four questions.

Supreme Court puts the breaks on the narrow constructions of FLSA exemptions

Photo by Coolcaesar (Own work),
via Wikimedia Commons

Yesterday, in a narrow 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that automobile service advisors are exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirements.

The exemption applies to “salesmen … primarily engaged in … servicing automobiles.” The majority broadly defined these terms to hold that the plaintiffs were exempt.

And while this aspect of the decision is interesting to automobile repair shops and car dealerships, it's the opinion’s broader implications that are more interesting to me.

The 6th nominee for the “worst employer of 2018” is … the sadistic sergeant

Thomas Schiermeyer was already a recruit for the Seaside Park, New Jersey, Police Department, when he applied to the Police Academy for a promotion to an entry-level Officer. 

The application process he alleges in his lawsuit is one that I’ve certainly never seen before, and one to which no employee ever should be subjected.

Don’t sleep on verifying reasonable accommodations

Photo by Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash

George Hirmiz, a front-desk clerk at a Travelodge Hotel, was caught on video sleeping in the hotel lobby while a fight broke out among its guests. After the hotel fired him, he claimed disability discrimination. His disability? An alleged illness that he had contracted from long-term exposure to high levels of electromagnetic voltage at the hotel.

The 7th Circuit had little difficultly affirming the dismissal of his lawsuit:

What does it mean to have “work/life balance”?

What’s your definition of “work/life balance”?

To me, work/life balance means that I have the flexibility to tend to the needs of family when the need arises, and otherwise work when and where I am able.

• No school bus this morning? I’ll get to the office at 9 am instead of 7:15.
• Doctor’s appointment? No worries. I’ll leave the office at 3 and finish up what needs to be done tonight.
• Bad weather? It’s not productive to waste two hours in traffic. I’ll work from home.
• Early evening gig for the kids? I’ll pick them up from school.

Let’s all try to remember to have gender-neutral employment policies

Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash

Former New Orleans Saints cheerleader Bailey Davis has filed a complaint with the EEOC accusing her former employer of having one set of rules for its male players, and another for its female cheerleaders.

The Saints fired Davis after it claimed she violated a rule prohibiting cheerleaders from appearing in photos nude, semi-nude, or in lingerie. She had posted a photo of herself in a one-piece outfit to her private Instagram.

OSHA resources to protect healthcare workers

Photo by Natanael Melchor on Unsplash

You might think that construction workers or manufacturing employees have the highest rate of workplace injuries. To the contrary, however, it’s healthcare workers.

On average, U.S. hospitals recorded 6.8 work-related injuries and illnesses for every 100 full-time employees, nearly twice the rate for private industry as a whole. The numbers are even higher for nursing and residential care facilities.

The most typical injuries include overexertion and repetitive stress; slips, trips, and falls; contact with objects; workplace violence; and exposure to harmful substances (including needle sticks).

Thankfully, if you are healthcare employer, OSHA has myriad publications to help.

WIRTW #499 (the “boarding house” edition)

The first time I ever heard of Jack White was August 10, 2001. I read about this up and coming band playing at the Beachland Ballroom. It was two-piece, the “brother” playing guitar and singing, and the “sister” on the drums. I was intrigued enough to check them out. Memory tells me that the first song Jack and Meg played that night was “Dead Leaves and the Dirty Ground.” Setlist.fm says it was “Let’s Shake Hands.” It doesn’t matter. After one song, I was completely hooked, and by the end of their set I had found a new artist to add to my musical pantheon.

Today, Jack White released his latest album, Boarding House Reach. Like everything he does, it rocks. It’s also brilliantly bonkers. Jack White is the mad scientist of 21st century rock ‘n’ roll. Like Bowie before him, Jack does an amazing job of changing things up from project to project, and this one does not disappoint.

Give it a listen:


Here’s what I read this week:

Ohio Chamber of Commerce takes the lead on fighting addiction at work with launch of its Employer Opioid Toolkit

Nearly 50,000 Americans lost their lives to opioid-related overdoses in 2016. Compare that figure to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, which recorded 43,000 deaths during its peak in 1995, or the entire Vietnam war, which saw 58,000 U.S. soldiers die.

Needless to say, our opioid problem is a national epidemic. And, Ohio sits right on the front lines, with the 3rd highest rate of annual opioid-related deaths, trailing only West Virginia and New Hampshire.

My state, however, is not taking this problem sitting down. Last week, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce launched its Employer Opioid Toolkit.

How can you transition older workers if you can’t force them to retire?

A Michigan oral surgery practice has agreed to pay $47,000 to settle an age discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC. The agency alleged that it violated the ADEA by maintaining a policy that required employees to retire at at 65. The lawsuit stemmed from the firing of an employee four days after her 65th birthday.

According to Kenneth Bird, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Indianapolis District Office, “December 2017 marked the 50th anniversary of the ADEA, Five decades later, the EEOC remains committed to vigorously enforcing that all-important law. Private employers need to understand that mandatory retirement policies run afoul of the ADEA and will be met with challenge.”

He’s absolutely correct.

I’m lovin’ it: McDonald’s settles joint employer case with NLRB

It has been nearly four years since the NLRB filed complaints against McDonald’s, seeking to hold it liable as a joint employer for the unfair labor practices of its franchisees. I have suggested that “if franchisors are equal under the National Labor Relations Act with their franchisees, then we will see the end of staffing agencies and franchises as a viable business model.”

In the interim, the NLRB has flip-flipped on its joint employment standard several times, and this very important area of the law has been in flux.

Now comes word that the NLRB and McDonald’s have reached an 11th hour settlement.

The 5th nominee for the “worst employer of 2018” is … the pension preventer

ERISA section 510 provides:

It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline, or discriminate against a participant or beneficiary for exercising any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of an employee benefit plan … or for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which such participant may become entitled under the plan.

The Supreme Court has long interpreted this section as “protect[ing] plan participants from termination motivated by an employer’s desire to prevent a pension from vesting.” As the 6th Circuit noted, “[T]he prohibitions were aimed primarily at preventing unscrupulous employers from discharging or harassing their employees in order to keep them from obtaining vested pension rights.”

Late Friday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe late Friday. McCabe was (almost) a 21-year veteran of the Bureau, and was to have retired just two days later. The March 16 firing, however, prevented McCabe both from voluntarily leaving the FBI and collecting his federal pension.

WIRTW #498 (the “blarney” edition)

Photo by Khara Woods on Unsplash

Tomorrow is St. Patrick’s Day. Have you ever thought about what the Patron Saint of Ireland can teach us about employment-law compliance? I did, seven years ago.

Click here for 10 compliance challenges to chase out of your workplace.

Here’s what I read this week:

Harassment training is about creating a culture, not checking a box

Bloomberg reports that demand for anti-harassment training videos has surged in the #MeToo era.

Here’s the problem, however. The Bloomberg article talks about training videos, the absolute worst kind of training.

Anti-harassment training is all about creating an anti-harassment culture in your workplace—about employees understanding what harassment is, how to complain about it, and that your company does not ever accept it.

How your problem employee is like an old hot water tank

Last night, my hot water tank died. It was old (14, to be exact).

During his shower, I heard Donovan yell, “Dad, there’s no hot water, and I’m freezing!” On a hunch, I traveled down to the basement, which is where I found puddles on the floor under and around the tank.

To be fair, we ignored a whole bunch of signals over the past few years. 

Fluctuating water temperatures. A 50-gallon tank that would often deplete in a half-hour. Neighbors that had replaced theirs years ago. 

Which got me thinking … an old hot water tank is not all that different from your problem employee.

Tattoos at work: more acceptance, yet still some legal risk

By ABC TV [Public domain],
via Wikimedia Commons

I am not a tattoo person. Yet, a whole lot of people are. And the numbers are increasing.

In fact, according to one recent survey, 3 in 10 Americans have at least one tattoo, up 50% in just four years. And, the younger you are, the more likely you are to sport a tattoo: 47% of millennials have a tattoo, as compared to 36% of gen Xers and only 13% of baby boomers.

Department of Labor trying to get employees PAID for inadvertent FLSA violations

Photo by Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash

For almost as long as I’ve been writing this blog, I’ve been preaching the proactive benefits of wage and hour audits for employers (e.g., here and here).

It appears that the Department of Labor agrees.

Last week, it announced a nationwide pilot program—the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program—which will permit employers to self-report FLSA violations to the Department of Labor without risk of litigation or enforcement proceedings. It enables employers to resolve inadvertent minimum wage and overtime violations without litigation.

WIRTW #497 (the “love” edition)

For the past 496 Fridays (plus a few off here and there) I have shared my list of what I read this week.

Implicit in each share is my recommendation that among those links are a few that you should read, too.

This week, however, there is only one thing you should (must) read.

Kevin Love, all-star power forward for the Cleveland Cavaliers, wrote about his life-long mental health issues.

6th Circuit is the latest court to conclude that Title VII expressly prohibits LGBT discrimination

Photo by Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash

Yesterday, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals joined a growing number of federal appellate courts to hold that Title VII’s prohibition against sex discrimination expressly covers LGBT employees.

The claimant in EEOC v. R.G. &. G.R. Harris Funeral Homes [pdf], Aimee Stevens (formerly known as Anthony Stephens) was born biologically male, and presented as such when hired. The funeral home’s owner and operator, Thomas Rost, fired her shortly after she informed him that she intended to transition from male to female and would represent herself and dress as a woman while at work.

“Measure twice, cut once," and, for the love of God, don’t email porn to everyone on your company’s contact list

Photo by Wes Hicks on Unsplash

In what may be the greatest (or, depending on your perspective, worst) employee mistake of all time, the Utah State Bar emailed a photo of a topless woman to more than 11,000 of its members.

For its part, the Bar has apologized, and has said it is investigating how the incident occurred and will publicize its findings.

Speculation on the cause of the unfortunate email ranges from hackers to a disgruntled employee.

It’s neither.

Readers, let me break this case for you.

The legal implications of employee tracking devices

Photo by N. on Unsplash

I once knew of company (not a client) at which its CEO would sit in his office all day and watch a bank of monitors connected to cameras all over the workplace so that he could track the productivity of his employees. He even had one outside the bathrooms to record how frequently, and for how long, his employees were taking potty breaks. Needless to say, morale among his employees was not great.

Monitoring of employees has gone even more high tech. The Chicago Tribune reports that Amazon has developed wristbands to track worker hand movements as they fill and ship orders in its warehouses and distribution centers.

A lesson on how to terminate an employee, care of David Brent.

In my opinion, the original British version of The Office is far superior to its American counterpart, in large part because David Brent is so much more cringe-worthy than Michael Scott.

I thought I’d start the week off with a little humor (and a little lesson), care of David Brent, via one of the most awkward employee terminations ever.

WIRTW #496 (the “troll” edition)

Troll:

“One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.”

– Urban Dictionary

Trolls are a sad an unfortunate part of life on the internet. I put myself out there on a daily basis, and there will be idiots in the comments below, or on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook, who will feel the need to have their ignorant say.

Courtney Barnett feels my pain, and crafted, via song, the perfect response:

Don’t you have anything better to do?
I wish that someone could hug you
Must be lonely
Being angry
Feeling over-looked
You sit alone at home in the darkness
With all the pent-up rage that you harness
I’m real sorry
’Bout whatever happened to you

 

Thanks CB!

Here’s what I read this week:

Save money on overtime payments with the fluctuating work week

Photo by rawpixel.com on Unsplash

In my never-ending quest to show you how many different ways you can screw up paying your employees under the federal wage and hour laws, today I am going to talk about how to properly calculate overtime payments for salaried, non-exempt employees.

An employer has two choices in how to pay overtime to a salaried non-exempt employee: by a fixed work week or by a fluctuating work week.

For reasons that will be illustrated below, the latter is a much more cost-effective option, and is your best way to save money overtime payments for this class of employees.

Spoiler alert: there is some math involved.

What the hell is going on at the NLRB with joint employment?

Photo by Cameron Kirby on Unsplash

If you are a small business owner, pay attention. Today’s update on the issue of joint employment will be one of the most important things you read this year.

Joint employment has been on a bit of a roller coaster ride at the NLRB over the past few months.

Today, I’m going to sort it all out for you, and try to explain where we might be headed next.


What is Joint Employment?

Joint employment is the sharing of control and supervision of an employee’s activity among two or more business entities, such that each is liable for the legal wrongs of the other to its employees (e.g., discrimination, wage and hour, OSHA, unfair labor practices…). It’s what would hold a franchisor liable for the wrongful acts of its franchisee, a contractor for its sub, and a business for its staffing company.

What are the Historic Joint Employment Rules?

For decades prior to August 27, 2015, is was uniformly established that for one entity to be a joint employer with another, it had to exercise direct and actual control over the terms and conditions of the other entities employees. Do they supervise? Are they subject to the same work rules? Can they hire, fire, and discipline? Who pays and how? Who provides benefits? Who assigns schedules and otherwise directs work? If one employer maintains control over these issues, then the other would not have been a joint employer.

Given this strict test, entities such as franchisors and general contractors felt reasonably comfortable that they were not liable for the acts of its franchisees and subs relative to their employees.

What Changed on August 27, 2015? 
Browning-Ferris Industries of Calif. 

In Browning-Ferris, the NLRB ignored and tossed out 40 years of precedent, and expanded the definition of “joint employer” not only to include those that exercise direct and actual control, but also those that exercise indirect control or reserve the potential to exercise control. OSHA and the DOL soon followed suit, and announced similar standards under their respective statutes. Small business owners, as well as other employers, (justifiably) panicked. If a franchisor, for example, is liable for the legal wrongs of its franchisees towards employees that the franchisor does not hire, fire, discipline, pay, or otherwise direct, why franchise at all? Why not just run the businesses, control the liabilities, and cut out the middle man?

December 14, 2017—Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss
Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors

In Hy-Brand, the NLRB expressly overruled Browning-Ferris and restored direct and actual control as the lone test for joint employment:

[W]e overrule Browning-Ferris and restore the joint-employer standard that existed prior to the Browning-Ferris decision. Thus, a finding of joint-employer status requires proof that the alleged joint-employer entities have actually exercised joint control over essential employment terms (rather than merely having “reserved” the right to exercise control), the control must be “direct and immediate” (rather than indirect), and joint-employer status will not result from control that is “limited and routine.”

Bravo. Employers rejoiced.


The Celebration was Short Lived

On February 26, 2018, the NLRB vacated Hy-Brand, restoring Browning-Ferris (and its potential/indirect control tests) as the law of the NLRA on joint employment. Why? Because current NLRB board member Bill Emanuel, one of the three votes in Hy-Brand in favor of overturning Browning-Ferris, was a partner at the law firm that represented Browning-Ferris in 2015. This decision followed the report of NLRB inspector general David Berry earlier this month, which concluded that Emanuel should have recused himself from Hy-Brand, not because Emanuel engaged in anything improper, but because the appearance of a potential conflict should have caused his recusal.


What now?

For now, Browning-Ferris remains the law on joint employment under the NLRA. And, it likely will continue as such, as without Emanuel, the highly politicized NLRB will almost certainly split 2-2 on any rehearing of Hy-Brand.

Browing-Ferris had been pending on appeal and awaiting decision. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, however, dismissed the appeal and remanded the case back the NLRB for disposition consistent with Hy-Brand. You should now expect more litigation over that issue in the D.C. Circuit.

As you can see, this issue is a bit of a muddled mess.

One easy solution is the federal (and bipartisan) Save Local Business Act. It expressly defines a “joint employer” under the NLRA and FLSA as one that—

directly, actually, and immediately, and not in a limited and routine manner, exercises significant control over essential terms and conditions of employment, such as hiring employees, discharging employees, determining individual employee rates of pay and benefits, day-to-day supervision of employees, assigning individual work schedules, positions, and tasks, or administering employee discipline.

It passed the House last November, and now awaits action in the Senate.

This past summer, I asked if joint employment was the issue to unite our divided country. For the sake of America’s small business owner, I certainly hope it does. If you are concerned about this issue (and you should be), call or email your Senator and Congressperson to urge their support of the Save Local Business Act.

2nd Circuit holds that Title VII expressly bars sexual orientation discrimination as sex discrimination

Photo by Matias Rengel on Unsplash

Yesterday, the 2nd Circuit federal court of appeals (which covers New York, Connecticut, and Vermont) held that “Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation as discrimination ‘because of … sex.’”

With its decision in Zarda v. Altitude Express [pdf], the 2nd Circuit joins the 7th Circuit, and the EEOC in interpreting Title VII as such.

My thoughts on this issue are well documented throughout the archives.

“Exhibit A” for what’s wrong with the Fair Labor Standards Act

Consider this scenario.

Employer and Employee have a good-faith dispute over whether Employer owes Employee for unpaid overtime for time Employee spent traveling.

Employee sues.

Court awards Employee $608.08 for unpaid overtime (doubled to $1,216.16 as liquidated damages).

So far, this all seems kosher.

Then, however, Employee files his petition for attorneys’ fees.

$141,236.50 in attorneys’ fees.

WIRTW #495 (the “guns” edition)

I am not a gun person. If you want to dismiss what I am about to say because of my dislike of guns, that is your prerogative. Just skip down to the links, or come back on Monday, or don’t come back at all (although the latter is a bit closed-minded).

We have a major gun problem is this country. The solution starts with a conversation about universal background checks for all owners of firearms, mandatory waiting periods, and bans on assault weapons.

When does telecommuting qualify as a reasonable accommodation?

I’m writing today’s post from the comfort of the kitchen island in my house. My son has the flu, and I’m working from home.

It’s been three years since the 6th Circuit decided EEOC v. Ford Motor Co., a groundbreaking decision in which the court issued its en banc decision declaring that telecommuting is not an appropriate reasonable accommodation, unless the employee can show that that regular attendance in the workplace, and face-to-face interaction with co-workers, are not essential elements of the employee’s job. 

Yesterday, the same court decided Mosby-Meachem v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division [pdf], which defined the parameters of when an employee’s job does qualify for remote work as a reasonable accommodation.

Two recent issues of confidentiality of harassment allegations

The confidentiality of harassment allegations has been a hot topic of debate in the #MeToo and #TimesUp era.

Consider, then, each of the following two pronouncements on the issue by two different branches of the federal government—one by the NLRB and one by Congress.

The FMLA does not cover dead pets (maybe)

‘E’s not pinin’! ‘E’s passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! ‘E’s expired and gone to meet ‘is maker! ‘E’s a stiff! Bereft of life, ‘e rests in peace! If you hadn’t nailed ‘im to the perch ‘e’d be pushing up the daisies! ‘Is metabolic processes are now ‘istory! ‘E’s off the twig! ‘E’s kicked the bucket, ‘e’s shuffled off ‘is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin’ choir invisible!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!

In all seriousness, it sucks to lose a pet.

But, does it qualify an employee for FMLA leave?

NLRB dismisses James Damore charge against Google—complaints about too much diversity are not protected

It is lawful for an employer to fire an employee who complains that his workplace is too diverse? 

According to the NLRB, the answer, at least under federal labor law, is yes, the termination is legal.

WIRTW #494 (the “affirmative action” edition)

Today, I am pleased to announce that Meyers Roman has expanded our employment-law capabilities by adding Douglas B. Brown, LLC (DBB), a boutique national affirmative action law firm.

I’ll quote my firm’s official statement:

Focusing on management-side affirmative action compliance, DBB will significantly broaden, support and strengthen our Labor & Employment Group to assure our clients’ compliance with the increasingly complex affirmative action and Equal Employment Opportunity regulations for federal contractors and subcontractors. 

DBB has served a wide range of clients in the manufacturing, mining, construction, communications, financial, health care, social services and educational sectors. 

According to Seth Briskin, Managing Partner and Chair of our Labor & Employment Practice group, “the addition of the DBB firm is a real differentiator for Meyers Roman. It gives us the unique ability to offer affirmative action plans and related employment law consulting to our federal contractor clients and DBB’s established client base as well as a growing number of new clients both in Ohio and across the country.”

If you are a federal contractor or subcontractor and need an affirmative action plan drafted or retooled, are engaged in an OFCCP audit, or otherwise need affirmative-action related services, please let me know how we can leverage our new capabilities to help your business.

Here’s what I read this week:

Can you pay your employees in Bitcoin?

“What is Bitcoin? I don’t understand how fake money works.”

These were the words of my 9-year-old last week.

Let me try to help him, and you, out.

Federal judge hands Grubhub a huge victory in groundbreaking gig economy trial

Raef Lawson worked as a restaurant delivery driver for Grubhub for four months in late 2015 and early 2016. He claimed that the company misclassified him as an independent contractor, and owed him overtime for hours he worked over 40 in any workweek.

Last week, in Lawson v. Grubhub [pdf], a California federal judge granted the gig-employer a huge victory by ruling that Lawson and all other similarly situated drivers are independent contractors, and not employees.

Love and work aren’t always peanut butter and chocolate

I listened with great interest to the latest episode of the Hostile Work Environment podcast, which featured as its guest my good friend, Dan Schwartz, talking about the pitfalls of Valentine’s Day at work.

Dan cited CareerBuilder’s annual V-Day survey, which offers some interesting stats about the current state of office romances:

• 22 percent of workers have dated their boss (up 7 percent from last year)
• 31 percent of workers who started dating at work ultimately married each other
• Almost one in ten female workers whose work romance soured left their job
• 41 percent of workers had to keep their romance a secret

Yet, love and work do not always go well together, especially on Valentine’s Day.