There’s no such thing as “reverse” discrimination—it’s all just discrimination

According to the New York Post, a Caucasian 20-year veteran attorney for the Legal Aid Society is suing her former employer for race discrimination. Among other issues in her lawsuit, she claims that she was denied a lateral move “because of ‘diversity considerations.’”

Do you know that some courts impose a different, higher legal standard for discrimination against white employees than for discrimination against African-American employees?

Don’t forget about overtime pay when providing bonuses to non-exempt employees

Last week Chipotle announced a new bonus plan that could earn its employees up to an extra month of pay each year. Per the chain’s press release, the program is offered quarterly and can result in a bonus worth one week’s pay, calculated as an individual’s average weekly pay per quarter. To qualify for the quarterly bonus program, restaurant teams must meet certain sales and cash goals.

This bonus program has the potential to be a great way for the restaurant to break through in a tight labor market to attract talent. It also, however, has the potential to pose an FLSA nightmare. Bonus payments often count as part of a non-exempt employee’s regular rate of pay, thereby increasing the overtime premium owed to that employee.

Does an employer have a duty to protect the personal information of its employees? (Part 3)

Employees trust their employers with a whole bunch of personal information. Social security numbers, medical documents, insurance records, birth dates, criminal records, credit reports, family information, etc. And it’s not like employees have a choice over whether to disclose and entrust this information to their employer. These documents are all necessary if employees want to get hired, get paid, and obtain health insurance and other benefits. Thus, an employer’s personnel records are a treasure trove of PII (personally identifiable information — any data that could potentially identify a specific individual, which can be used to distinguish one person from another and de-anonymizing otherwise anonymous data).

For this reason, cyber-criminals target myriad businesses in an attempt to steal (and then sell on the dark web) this data.

If a company is hacked, and employees’ PII or other data is stolen, is their employer liable to its employees for any damages caused by the data breach?

Facebook video sinks employee’s FMLA claim

Everything was going swimmingly for Thomas Dunger during his approved FMLA leave from his job as a mechanic for Union Pacific Railroad … until he decided to go on a fishing trip during his leave and a co-worker started live streaming their excursion on Facebook. A coworker showed the video to Dunger’s supervisor, who charged him with dishonesty for improper FMLA use. To his benefit (or, cynically, because he knew he had been hooked), at his disciplinary hearing Dunger copped to the fishing trip. His late-to-the-game attempt at honesty, however, did not save his job, and Union Pacific ultimately fired him. 

Employers are making new dog ownership a little less ruff by offering “pawternity” leave

In three days, my family grows by one. We’re adding a puppy.

My wife and kids have been clamoring for a new dog for a year. Loula (our current dog) is seven years old, and they don’t want to be in a position of not having a dog in our family. Plus, we don’t want to wait until Loula’s too old to tolerate the energy of a new puppy.

The Customer isn’t always right: The Museum of Sex(ual harassment)

Just because an employee works at The Museum of Sex does not mean that she wants be sexually harassed. Or least that’s what Katherine McMahon alleges in her lawsuit against her former employer.

The New York Post offers the salacious details:

“Patrons and co-workers of the Museum grope its employees, use utterly inappropriate sexual language, and inquire into employees’ private sex lives,” the suit alleges. 

WIRTW #557 (the “infinity and beyond” edition)

Toy Story has played a huge party in my life. Donovan is a Toy Story fanatic. He’s seen every movie hundreds of times. He has what seems like every toy and every stuffy. Until the age of 6, every article of clothing he owned had a Toy Story character on it somewhere. Buzz and Woody (but especially Buzz) got him (and, by extension, us) through some really tough times when Donovan was a toddler. How could we do anything other than see Toy Story 4 on opening night.

My four word, spoiler-free review: Go now! (Bring tissues.)

My slightly longer, still spoiler-free review: Lots and lots of tissues.

My even longer, yet still spoiler-free review: Nostalgia has a very strong pull. It’s apt that much of this movie takes place in an antique shop, a place that’s all about nostalgia. Toy Story is extraordinarily nostalgic for my family, and if this is end of the road for the series, I can’t imagine a better ending.

Here’s what I read this week:

Is blockchain technology the next frontier in combating sexual harassment?

According to Employee Benefit News, Vault Platform has developed an app that uses blockchain technology to allow employees to document and report workplace sexual harassment on their smartphones.

“Interesting,” you say,” but what’s blockchain technology?”

The 12th nominee for the “worst employer of 2019” is … the disguised doctor

Norma Melgoza, a long-time employee of Rush University Medical Center, is suing her employer for sex discrimination and equal-pay violations stemming from a denied application for a promotion.

In support of her claim of glass ceiling gender bias, Melgoza points to certain misconduct of the interviewing physician. I’ll let the district court explain.

What’s a hostile work environment? You’ll know it when you see it.

“I know it when I see it.” These are the famous words of Justice Potter Stewart defining legal obscenity in his concurring opinion in Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964).

I feel the same way about a hostile work environment. For a hostile work environment to be actionable, it must (among other factors) be objectivity hostile. What does this mean? It’s hard to define, but I know it when I see it.

How long of a leash must you give an employee before firing?

When a client calls me to ask for advice about firing an employee, the first question I always ask is, “What does the employee’s file look like?” I want to know if there exists a documented history of performance issues to justify the termination, and whether said issues are known and understood by the employee.

I ask these questions for two reasons:

1. Can the employer objectively prove the misconduct to a judge or jury? Fact-finders want to see documentation, and if it’s lacking, they are more likely to believe that the misconduct was not bad enough to warrant documentation, or worse, that it did not occur. In either case, a judge or jury reaching this conclusion is bad news for an employer defending the termination in a lawsuit.


2. Surprises cause bad feelings, which lead to lawsuits. If an employee has notice of the reasons causing the discharge, the employee is much less likely to sue. Sandbagged employees become angry ex-employees. You do not want angry ex-employees going to lawyers, especially when you lack the documentation to support the termination.

So what does quality documentation to support a termination look like? Consider Anderson v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (N.D. Ohio May 29, 2019).

Do your employees understand that social media is a very public conversation?

“It’s 2019. All of our employees have been on Facebook for years. Many are also on Twitter, and Instagram, and … We don’t need to do any social media training.”

If you’ve had these thoughts or internal conversations, allow me to offer Exhibit 1 as to why you are wrong.

Texas district votes to fire teacher who tried to report

undocumented students to Trump on Twitter

WIRTW #556 (the “comfort zone” edition)

My comfort zone is most definitely not at a biker rally. Yet, that's where I found myself last Saturday afternoon. The things we do for our kids. 🤷‍♂️

Click here for Fake ID’s killer set opener, War Pigs, by Black Sabbath, recorded at the Ohio Bike Week Block Party.

Needless to say, I’m pretty darn proud of my (not so) little girl.

Your next chance to see them live is June 15 at Crocker Park, in Westlake, Ohio. Details here for this free show.

Here’s what I read this week.

An obituary for employment at-will

Over at her employee-rights blog, Screw You Guys, I’m Going Home, attorney Donna Ballman asks, “Is is time to terminate at-will employment laws?“

Well, Donna, there’s no need to terminate these laws; they are already dead.

SCOTUS decides whether Title VII’s charge-filing precondition to suit is jurisdictional or non-jurisdictional

If the U.S. Supreme Court decided an employment case, I’m contractually obligated to blog about it. Yet, Ford Bend County, Texas v. Davis, which it decided earlier this week, is of little practical import.

To file a private employment discrimination lawsuit under one of the federal employment discrimination statutes, a plaintiff must first exhaust his or her remedies by filing a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

What happens, however, if the employee skips over the EEOC and proceeds straight to court? Does that court even have jurisdiction over the claim, or is the omitted EEOC filing merely an affirmative defense for an employer to raise in seeking dismissal of the lawsuit?

Proposed law wants to convert “anti-vaxxer” into a protected class

With a couple of important exceptions, an employer can require that employees be up to date on their vaccinations.

The exceptions?

     1/ An employee with an ADA disability that prevents him or her from receiving a vaccine may be entitled to an exemption from a mandatory vaccination requirement as a reasonable accommodation.

     2/ An employee with a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance that prevents him or her from receiving a vaccine may also be entitled to an exemption from a mandatory vaccination requirement as a reasonable accommodation.

Thorough internal investigation saves employer from discrimination claim

A bank fires two female employees for violating its vault-access policy. They claim sex discrimination, pointing their fingers squarely at three male employees who they say violated the same policy, but only received performance counseling.

Open and shut discrimination case? Not quite.

WIRTW #555 (the “you get a shirt, and you get a shirt…” edition)

I ❤️ that my daughter’s band is now selling its own merch.

Here’s what I read this week.

The top 10 wage and hour mistakes businesses keep making

No law causes employers more compliance headaches than the Fair Labor Standards Act. On its face it’s simple—pay employees no less than a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour (or more, depending on your state or locality), and non-exempt employees an overtime premium of 1.5 times their regular rate of pay for any hours worked in excess of 40 in any work week.

Simple on its face, yet extraordinarily complicated in application. This law costs employers billions of dollars per year in non-compliance.

Does the attorney-client privilege protect harassment investigations conducted by a lawyer?

An employee complaints to HR that her supervisor has been sexually harassing her. The allegations aren’t pretty, and, if the investigation is mishandled (or even if it’s handled perfectly), you are reasonably confident that the employee will sue the company. Thus, you want to ensure that every “i” is dotted and “t” crossed in the investigation. So, you bring in the big guns to handle the investigation—the company’s attorney.

At the conclusion of the investigation, the lawyer recommends that the company suspend, and not fire the harasser. That decision leads to the victim filing suit.

During her lawsuit, the employee requests a copy of the investigatory report. You refuse, claiming it’s protected by the attorney-client privilege.

What does a valid jury waiver look like?

Earlier this year, the Senate took up the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act. It would, among other things, prohibit employers from requiring employees, as a condition of employment, to sign agreements submitting employment and civil rights claims to arbitration in lieu of filing in court. According to Vox.com, this legislation has some initial bipartisan support, and has some legit traction to perhaps become law.

I am on record as not being a fan of arbitration for employment disputes. I do not believe they are any less expensive or time consuming that in-court litigation. In stead, I've previously argued for tools such as contractually shortened statutes of limitations and jury waivers as tools employers can to limit risk instead of arbitration agreements.

WIRTW #554 (the “triumph” edition)

How do we raise our girls to become confident women? It’s a question I think about a lot as a dad to an almost teenage girl.

🙋‍♀️ We encourage them to pursue their passions.
🙋‍♀️ We get them working collaboratively with other girls.
🙋‍♀️ We put them into positions to gain leadership skills.
🙋‍♀️ We praise their successes.

While I love School of Rock for both of my kids, this is why I especially love it for my daughter.

To see an almost 13-year-old (everyone wish Norah a Happy Birth Day for Monday) command a stage with skill and passion, and with the love, respect, and admiration of her peers, older and younger, fills this dad with a ton of pride and joy.

And it tells me that she’ll be just fine as an adult, whether her journey is through music or otherwise.

So enjoy Norah doing her thing last weekend (along with Donovan’s fly dance moves), taking the lead on Triumph by the Screaming Females.

As for Norah’s own band, Fake ID, you have two chances to see them live over the next few weeks.

• June 1 @ Ohio Bike Week, in Sandusky. They’ll be on the Scott Gast Memorial Stage, at Columbus Ave. and Water St., from 3:30 - 5 pm. 
• June 15 @ Crocker Park, in Westlake. They’ll be rocking the square in front of Regal Cinemas from 5:30 - 7 pm.

Both shows are open to the public and free. Keep an eye out for the merch table to grab your official Fake ID t-shirt.

Here’s what I read this week:

Defining (and defending) my role as an attorney: more on the employment of registered sex offenders

On Tuesday, I posted something that I did not imagine would be all that controversial, You just found out you hired a sex offender. Now what? Boy howdy was I wrong.

Over at Workforce.com (which syndicates my blog daily), the post had received (so far) 117 (mostly) alarmingly negative comments.

In harassment cases, the context of profanities matters (but only sometimes)

“Why is everyone suddenly using the C-word,” asks Stan Carey in The Guardian? He blames Game of Thrones (video very NSFW—you’ve been warned).

Assuming Stan’s correct, and more people are becoming more comfortable openly using this generally considered highly offensive and taboo word, how should you react if your employees start using it among each other? Swiftly and decisively, that’s how.

You just found out you hired a sex offender. Now what?

A reader sent me the following question.

I worked for a grocery store. Can a child molester be employed by the grocery store? I reported it to the manager, and showed proof and nothing was done about it.

There’s a lot going on here. What does the law require an employer to do (if anything) under these circumstances? And what should an employer do when it discovers it is employing a sex offender?

The 11th nominee for the “worst employer of 2019” is … the 💩y supervisor

From the legaladvice subreddit:

So background, I have IBS and sometimes have to go the bathroom multiple times per work day. My supervisor doesn’t believe I am legitimately using the bathroom, so he said today at the end of the day today if I don’t send him a picture or otherwise prove that I used the bathroom, I will lose 15 minutes of paid time. What sort of recourse do I have?

WIRTW #553 (the “669” edition)

Jack Ma, the founder of Alibaba (China’s answer to Amazon), claims that he has cracked the formula to a happy and productive workforce.

His answer? 669.

What does that mean? According to The Telegraph—

“We want 669 in life. What is 669? Six times in six days; the emphasis is on nine,” he said at a company gathering, referring to sex, and using a play on words, as the word “nine” in Mandarin is a homophone for the word “long.”

He wants his employees to have long sex six times every six days. 

And you thought American employers had issues?

Here’s what else I read this week.

Abortion discrimination = pregnancy discrimination

Thanks to, among other states, Alabama, Georgia, and Ohio (sorry about that last one), the debate over abortion is raging. Suppose you are staunchly anti-abortion, and you learn that one of your employees is considering, or has had, an abortion. Can you fire her?

Thus far, three courts have looked at this issue, and all three courts have all reached the same conclusion.

No.

No, the feds should not ban noncompetes because of #MeToo

A recent op-ed in the USAToday argues that the federal government should outlaw noncompete agreements because they trap workers in abusive workplaces.

Since women who complain about harassment face retaliation and even termination, often the only way to escape it is to find a new job. Yet for many women, continuing their careers with a new employer turns out to be impossible. 

That is because of noncomplete clauses. After they have resigned or even been fired, workers bound by noncompetes cannot accept employment in the same line of work or industry as their former employer for a specified period in a certain city, state or even the entire country. Nearly 30 million working people, including more than 12 million women, are locked into their jobs because of noncompete clauses.…

By depriving them of outside employment opportunities, noncompetes lock victims of harassment into abusive environments. 

I could not disagree more. Noncompete clauses are not responsible for trapping sexual harassment victims in abusive workplaces.

Ohio lawmakers seek to expand the protections of the Ohio Whistleblower Act

Laws protecting whistle-blowers from retaliation have a long and storied history in the annals of American law. Indeed, according to The Personal Toll of Whistleblowing, recently published in The New Yorker*, these laws date back 241 years to the American Revolution and the Second Continental Congress:

The first documented whistle-blowing case in the United States took place in 1777, not long after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, when a group of naval officers, including Samuel Shaw and Richard Marven, witnessed their commanding officer torturing British prisoners of war. When they reported the misconduct to Congress, the commanding officer charged Shaw and Marven with libel, and both men were jailed. The following year, Congress passed a law protecting whistle-blowers, and Shaw and Marven were acquitted by a jury.

Crasslighting — Oops, #NotYou is NEVER a defense to #MeToo

Gaslighting — the manipulation of someone by psychological means to question their own sanity. It’s a term you’ve likely heard of.

But, have you heard of crasslighting? Me neither, until I read Did he just harass you or are you imagining it? You might be a victim of ‘crasslighting.’ in The Washington Post.

WIRTW #552 (the “comment of the week” edition)

Big thanks to Kristi Birkeland for the comment of the week, in response to yesterday's 12th blogiversary post.

If I ever I get the t-shirts and coffee mugs printed with this tagline, Kristi gets the first one.

Happy 12th Anniversary to the Ohio Employer Law Blog

Twelve years ago today I launched the Ohio Employer Law Blog.

On May 9, 2007, I published, The Song Remains the Same — Has Burlington Northern Really Changed the Landscape of Retaliation Claims? Not my finest work, but everyone’s gotta start somewhere.

In the dozen years since, I’ve published 3,135(!) posts, which you have read millions of times. It’s truly astounding to me, and I thank all of you who have read, clicked, shared, commented, and connected with me over the years. The absolute best part of this endeavor is the relationships I’ve built and friendships I’ve made.

Workplace civility shouldn’t be something we have to legislate

Workplace harassment isn’t illegal unless it is harassment because of some protected characteristic (sex, race, age, religion, national origin, disability, or any other class protected by law). Generalized workplace bullying or other mistreatment is not illegal unless it falls into one of those categories. Indeed, as the Supreme Court has repeatedly reminded us, workplace discrimination laws are not “a general civility code.”

Lessons from Game of Thrones on an employee’s duty of loyalty #spoileralert

If you haven’t yet watched this week’s episode of Game of Thrones, consider yourself warned. There are spoilers below. Turn back now if you don’t want to be spoiled.

Your employees do not understand their (lack of) free speech rights

Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech….

So reads the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

Take note that it does not say, “You have absolute freedom of speech in all things at all times.” It only prohibits government-imposed restrictions on speech.

Yet, just last week, President Trump tweeted the following:

I am continuing to monitor the censorship of AMERICAN CITIZENS on social media platforms. This is the United States of America — and we have what’s known as FREEDOM OF SPEECH! We are monitoring and watching, closely!!

I promise you that if the President of the United States does not understand how the 1st Amendment works, your employees don’t understand it either.

WIRTW #551 (the “he went for the head” edition)

#DontSpoilTheEndGame

Really! DON’T SPOIL ENDGAME.

A Friendswood, Texas, Domino’s employee learned this lesson the hard way. He was cited by police after he assaulted a co-worker for revealing an Avengers: Endgame spoiler.

According to ABC13, no one at Domino’s wanted to talk about the incident, and the employee did not respond to inquiries.

Here’s what I read this week:

A cautionary tale on why we background check employees

A cautionary tale on why employers should conduct thorough background checks on employers.

In late 2013, Kristl Thompson, Ashley Raby, and Corbie Leslie filed a lawsuit against The Scott Fetzer Company (doing business as “The Kirby Company”), Crantz Development, and John Fields. The women claimed Fields had sexually assaulted them (including verbal abuse and harassment, inappropriate touching, forced sexual acts, and rape) on numerous occasions between May 2012 and January 2013. A number of these allegations resulted in felony and misdemeanor convictions against Fields.

Handshakes, children’s poems, and the loss of responsibility

Handshakes could be BANNED under new workplace rules to avoid expensive sexual harassment claims

So reads a headline in The Sun. No one is actually considering banning handshakes. Instead, it’s a cautionary “what if” from an “employment expert,” saying what could happen if employers take sexual harassment precautions to far.

I thought of that story as I read a different story yesterday, one about book of children’s poems banned from Costco because a “concerned mom” did not like the content of one of the poems.

Should you pay if your business is attacked by ransomware?

Cleveland Hopkins Airport flight information boards have been out of service since last Monday (story here). Yesterday, after paying contractors more than $750,000 to restore them, the City finally acknowledged the cause—a ransomware attack.

Ransomware is malicious software that locks and encrypts a victim’s computer data. The criminal then demands a ransom to restore access, usually within a set amount of time. If the ransom is not paid, the data is destroyed.

I REALLY thought people knew better not to advertise jobs “for whites”

Cynet Systems, an IT and engineering staffing company, had a viral mess on its hands over the weekend, after it posted a job that asked for candidates “Preferably Caucasian.”

WIRTW #550 (the #NoSpoilers edition)

What are your plans this weekend? I'll be avoiding the internet until 10:30 Sunday night.

We have a 6:40 Saturday showing of Avengers: Endgame, followed by Sunday night on the couch to see if the the gathered forces of good at Winterfell can stop the Night King and his army of the dead on Game of Thrones.

😒 where is Thanos when you need him... #Eurovison #Euronvision pic.twitter.com/a1QuqCjKNP

— The Night King (@WightsKing) May 12, 2018

I'll need a Xanax and a glass of wine to get to sleep after all this is done. #NoSpoilers

Here's what I read this week:

Supreme Court signs off on death by a thousand cuts

Lingchi was a form of torture and execution used in China from roughly 900 BC until China banned in 1905. It translates variously as the slow process, the lingering death, or slow slicing. It's more commonly known as "death by a thousand cuts," in which the torturer uses a knife to methodically remove portions of the body over an extended period of time, ultimately resulting in death.

Yesterday, in Lamps Plus v. Varela, the Supreme Court held that parties to an arbitration agreement cannot be required to arbitrate their claims as a class action unless they specifically agreed to do so in the arbitration agreement.

This disability discrimination lawsuit was no party

Party City has agreed with the EEOC to pay $155,000 to settle an ADA lawsuit the agency filed on behalf of a rejected job applicant on the autism spectrum and suffering from severe anxiety.

According to the lawsuit, the individual had been receiving services from Easter Seals of New Hampshire to build up her self-confidence, including working and applying for a job. These services included a job coach.

Supreme Court grants review in three cases to decide, once and for all, whether Title VII protects LGBTQ employees from discrimination

Yesterday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear appeals in three cases, to decide whether Title VII's prohibition against "sex discrimination" expressly includes prohibitions against LGBTQ discrimination.

Does Title VII protect heterosexuals from discrimination?

So meet, ROBERTa! Shopping in the women’s department for a swimsuit at the BR Target. For all of you people that say you don’t care what bathroom it’s using, you’re full of shit!! Let this try to walk in the women’s bathroom while my daughters are in there!! #hellwillfreezeoverfirst

Suppose you own a company, and one of your employees posts this rant on her personal Facebook page. Further suppose that in addition to owning the company, you are also a lesbian, and take offense to the employee's views. If you discipline the employee for her Facebook post, and later fire the employee after she complains about the discipline, can the employee sue for retaliation under Title VII? In other words, does Title VII protect heterosexuals from discrimination in reaction to anti-LGBTQ speech?

In O'Daniel v. Industrial Service Solutions, the 5th Circuit said no.

The case put the plaintiff, unabashedly and vocally anti-LGBTQ (as expressed in the at-issue Facebook post), in the position of arguing that Title VII protects against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The Court held that under its own precedent, O'Daniel could not move forward on her claim.

O'Daniel claims in essence that she was retaliated against because she "opposed" discrimination perpetrated against her on the basis of her heterosexual orientation.… Title VII in plain terms does not cover "sexual orientation." … Because the law in this circuit is clear, we cannot accept O'Daniel’s … suggestions that this panel either overrule the precedents or assume arguendo that the "trend" has upended them.

Thus, because the 5th Circuit does not recognize sexual orientation as class Title VII protects, and employee's complaints about her employer discriminating against her because she is heterosexual could not support a retaliation claim: "Title VII protects an employee only from retaliation for complaining about the types of discrimination it prohibits."

Two points to make about this opinion.

First, if Title VII equates LGBTQ discrimination to "sex" discrimination (as I, like many other courts and the EEOC, believe it does), then logic says that it must also protect heterosexuals from discrimination at the hands of the LGBTQ community because of their sexual orientation. Any other result is logically inconsistent.

Secondly, this employee was not fired because she complained about discrimination. She was fired because she exhibited extremely poor judgment through her Facebook rant. As the concurring opinion succinctly and correctly states: "Simply put, Title VII does not grant employees the right to make online rants about gender identity with impunity." If the employee ranted against interracial marriage, and the company's African-American owner fired her, would anyone think she has a valid claim? This case is no different. The law protects the employee from discrimination and retaliation, but it does not protect the employee's right to express bigoted views, on her personal Facebook page or otherwise.

* Photo by Jim Wilson on Unsplash

WIRTW #549 (the #RespectIsComing edition)

You might have heard that a little show called Game of Thrones premiered it's final season last Sunday. In its honor, Sesame Street prepared a wonderful parody in which Elmo tries to mend bridges between Tyrion and Cersei by teaching them the importance of respect.

A lesson we should all to take to heart, especially at work.


Here's what I read this week:

How to fire an employee

The Wall Street Journal recently asked this simple question:

What's the Best Way to Fire Someone?

I have some thoughts.

Bathroom conversations aren't private conversations

Michael Woods, a mortgage banker at Quicken Loans, was having a bad day at work. A customer Woods had helped four years ago had been trying to get in touch with a Client Specialist; the company routed the call to Woods because of their prior relationship. He aired his grievance to a co-worker, Austin Laff, while they were in the bathroom together. "The client should get in touch with a fucking Client Care Specialist and quit wasting my fucking time."

Jorge Mendez, a supervisor, overheard this conversation from a stall. He responded with an all-employee email reminding everyone of proper conduct in public areas. "Never, EVER, should we be swearing in the bathroom especially about clients."

That's how the ball bounces: 6th Circuit says that the ADA does not require a new supervisor as a reasonable accommodation

Cindy Tinsley was so stressed.

How stressed was she?

She was so stressed that even something as simple as her co-workers at Caterpillar Financial Services bouncing stress balls off the ground would trigger her post-traumatic stress disorder.

Maybe you should rethink telling your employee you're firing him becaus of his heart problems

Jonathan Baum worked as a scheduler for Metro Restoration Services. In late 2014, he began have cardiac problems. Over the course of the next several months, he went to the ER fearing a heart attack, had a heart catheter implanted, had an echocardiogram, and wore a heart monitor. He occasionally also missed work for medical tests and treatments, and sometimes worked remotely. His boss, and the owner of Metro, Patrick Cahill, was aware of all of Baum's medical issues.

Following a work day on which Baum had worked remotely from his home. Cahill fired him. The expressly stated reason: "health issues and doctors' appointments."

Oops.

WIRTW #548 (the “working for the weekend” edition)

I thought I'd update everyone on the summer goings-on of Northeast Ohio's favorite age-15-and-under cover band, Fake ID.

They have a busy summer. They will kick it off with a return engagement at Ohio Bike Week. After stealing the festival last year (really, go to the Ohio Bike Week Facebook page and read the reviews), they've been invited back to tear it up again.

Loverboy … and Fake ID. My 10-year-old self watching MTV in my grandparents' basement is totally freaking out.

Then, the band has a residency booked at Westlake's Crocker Park. They'll be playing on June 15, July 6, August 9, and August 20 (all from 5:30 – 7, on the square in front of the movie theater).

Pretty cool stuff for my 12-year-old daughter.

Here's what I read this week:

The three things you need to know from the EEOC's 2018 charge data

Yesterday, the EEOC released its charge statistics for 2018. There are three big things you need to know.

When workplace training goes very, very wrong

A few months ago I participated in active-shooter training. I presented harassment training for a local manufacturer, and, at its conclusion, the company played a 10-minute video explaining to its employees what to do in an active-shooter situation. Generally I'm not a fan of training videos. They tend to be boring, poorly acted, and ineffective. This one, however, was quite effective. It was not only chilling to watch, but, a few months out, I still recall the ABCs of what to do during an active shooter (Avoid, Barricade, Confront).

An Indiana school district, however, had a different idea of how to train its employees to prepare for an active shooter.

This employer had its employees shot in the back, execution style, with plastic pellets.

To help end sexual harassment, men MUST be better in reporting it when they witness it

"Dad, something bad happened at recess today!"

It's a refrain I sometimes hear at the dinner table.

"Donovan, what happened?"

"Joe pushed Billy off the swing, and Billy cut his knee when he fell."

"Did anyone let a teacher know what happened?"

"No."

"Why not?"

"I didn't because I didn't want to be a tattletale."

I've had this conversation with both of my kids — the difference between being a tattletale and reporting an unsafe situation.

The 10th nominee for the “worst employer of 2019” is … the exorcising employer

Is it too early to declare a winner for 2019's contest?

According to the complaint Jason Fields fired against the Hampton Inn at which he worked, and its manager, Sharon Lindon, he had to endure some pretty odd stuff during his employment.

As he tells his story, Lindon decided to help Field's after she learned of his impending divorce. How? By offering to exorcise him.

WIRTW #547 (the “new music Friday” edition)

Jenny Lewis just released the first great album of 2019.  

On The Line has witty and funny, yet touching and sad, lyrics, and beautiful melodies that will stick in your head. It's an album that commands your attention. I'll be shocked if it's not at the top of the "Best Of" lists at year's end. You should listen, now and often.

I fart in your general direction: flatulence as harassment?

An Australian court has rejected an employee's claim that his supervisor unlawfully harassed him by farting on him.

David Hingst sought 1.8 million Australian dollars ($1.3 million) in damages based on a claim his supervisor would enter his small, windowless office several times a day and "break wind on him or at him … thinking this to be funny."