The 10th nominee for the Worst Employer of 2024 is … the desecrated discriminator

"We were forced to work with 'Nazi sympathizers' who — despite their open and obvious beliefs and frequent racist, antisemitic, xenophobic, and anti-LGBTQ+ comments and discriminatory acts — were retained and even promoted to management."

Those are the claims of 7 current and former employees of a rehab center owned by Executive Recovery Group.

Harassing text messages doom employee's discrimination lawsuit

Derek Blockhus, a United Airlines flight attendant, was fired after sending threatening texts and voicemails to a coworker and former romantic partner. 

His messages included threats like, "You do realize, your dad and all his friends are going to get nudes of you?" and "The situation will get ugly" if she didn't respond. Blockhus sued, claiming his firing must have been because of his disability, age, and FMLA leave.

The 7th Circuit disagreed, affirming that United terminated him for violating its harassment policies, not discrimination or leave interference.

"100% healed" = 100% illegal

The EEOC has sued Navitas Systems for its "100% healed" return to work policy.

The case involves the company's former division controller, who suffered a severe rotator cuff injury and fractured wrist. His doctor cleared him to return to work with restrictions, limiting the use of his injured left arm. Confident that he could still handle all the essential functions of his job with his right arm, he asked to come back to work, despite Navitas's policy. The company, however denied his request and fired him.

"Policies that require an employee to be restriction-free before returning to work run afoul of the ADA," said Miles Uhlar, the local EEOC trial attorney handling the case. "This employee could have performed the essential functions of his position. By strictly applying its '100% release' policy, Navitas violated the ADA."

WIRTW #731: the 'futebol' edition

As we are just about half-way through the high school soccer season, it's a good time to check in on the Lake Ridge Academy Royals. 

When we last left the Royals 11 months ago, they were eliminated from the 2023 state playoff tournament in their district semifinal. This year's senior-dominant team is on a mission, which thus far they are on track to complete. The team is off to a 7-1 start, with their only loss coming to a much bigger and stronger Shaker Hts. squad that is currently a top 7 team in Ohio's D-II. (After a realignment for this school year, Ohio now has five soccer divisions, with schools placed based on size; as result LRA moved from D-III to D-V.)

In D-V, LRA is currently ranked 8th in the state. This weekend, however, brings what is likely their stiffest test of the season, a weekend trip to Toledo for a tournament and a probable finals matchup against the host, 15th ranked Maumee Valley Country Day (a team that I do not believe LRA has ever defeated). Saturday night is also LRA's homecoming dance, and I really hope Donovan and his teammates have a tournament trophy with which to celebrate. 

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

The 9th nominee for the Worst Employer of 2024 is … the miscarriage of justice

Today, I'm adding Troy Corp. to my list of 2024's Worst Employers—and this one hits hard.

According to a recent lawsuit, Michelle Tan-Torres, in-house legal counsel at Troy Corp., discovered that the baby she was carrying had Trisomy 13, a rare and serious genetic disorder. Shortly after, she tragically suffered a miscarriage. Instead of offering support, her employer fired her.

A textbook example of FAFO

When a judge or jury finds your client dishonest, they've decided your fate. If that dishonesty involves lying to the court, your client may never get the chance to face a jury.

A prime example is Deering v. Lockheed Martin, a case recently decided by the 8th Circuit.

Musings on Springfield and national origin discrimination and harassment

We need to talk about the false and xenophobic rumors about Haitian migrants eating cats and dogs in Springfield, Ohio, stoked by a certain Presidential candidate. Schools, universities, hospitals, and even city government buildings have been closed because of threats of violence. And it's reasonable to assume that Haitians legally working in the businesses in and around Springfield are facing unlawful harassment as a result. It's inexcusable.

Per the EEOC, "Title VII prohibits employment discrimination, including unlawful harassment, based on national origin — meaning discrimination due to a complainant's, or the complainant’s ancestors', place of origin. Harassment based on national origin includes ethnic epithets, derogatory comments about individuals of a particular nationality, and use of stereotypes about the complainant's national origin."

Here are 4 tips for all employers to proactively address these issues in your workplaces:

WIRTW #730: the 'permission v. foregiveness' edition

Recently, my 18-year-old daughter, now off at college, told us she was planning to get her nose pierced. Norah didn't just come home with it done; she let us know ahead of time before going through with it. She's an adult and we're not in a position to forbid it. Nevertheless, as parents we appreciated that she cares enough about us that she was upfront about her plans instead of surprising us with it when we see her in a couple of weeks.

This made me reflect on how, in the workplace, we often deal with the balance between asking for permission and forgiveness. My daughter's approach—ahead of time—parallels the best kind of employee-manager relationship. When employees feel comfortable sharing their plans, seeking input, and then moving forward, it fosters trust and mutual respect. Without trust and mutual respect, a workplace cannot function effectively.

Employers can learn from this. Encouraging open communication and a culture of transparency allows you to build stronger relationships with your team. Employees who seek guidance ahead of time are showing respect for their role and their leaders, just like my daughter did with her decision.

In the end, it's all about creating an environment in which asking for permission feels right, and when necessary and appropriate, offering forgiveness can help people learn and grow.

On this week's episode of The Norah and Dad Show Podcast, Norah shares all about the experience. It's available via Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, Overcast, the web, and everywhere else you get your podcasts. While you're there, hit the "subscribe" button to make sure you get each new episode automatically delivered to you as soon as it drops.

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

This is what an illegal plan closure looks like, and the consequences an employer can face as a result

In December 2020, Quickway Transportation made the decision to close one of its distribution terminals after facing a union organizing drive led by Local 89 of the Teamsters Union. The drivers at the terminal, which served Kroger, had voted to unionize, prompting concerns from Quickway's leadership about potential strikes that could disrupt operations at the distribution center. Fearing financial losses from a possible strike, Quickway chose to terminate its contract with Kroger and ceased all operations at the terminal, laying off all drivers at that facility.

The 6th Circuit upheld the NLRB's finding that Quickway violated the NLRA when it closed its Kroger terminal because the closure was motivated by anti-union animus.

Location tracking of employee raises interesting legal issues

In an effort to dial back its current work-from-home culture, PricewaterhouseCoopers will start tracking where some of its employees work. It will start requiring its UK employees to spend a minimum of 3 days per week in the office and will use location data to manage their in-person attendance.

While there is nothing per se illegal about tracking employees in this manner, but I question whether it's a good HR practice. Indeed, there's quite the creep factor. How much will your employees mind Big Brother tracking all of their movements, and how will it impact morale?

And there still are some legal risks.

WIRTW #729: the 'mobile' edition

As cell phones have become ubiquitous among teenagers, their impact on student life is undeniable—and not always positive. Numerous studies have highlighted the risks and dangers of cell phone use by high school students:

📲 Mental Health: Research shows that excessive cell phone use is linked to increased anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbances among teens. A study by Common Sense Media found that 50% of teens feel addicted to their phones.

📲 Academic Performance: Studies have found that schools that ban mobile phones see an increase in student test scores, with low-achieving students benefiting the most.

📲 Cyberbullying: According to the Cyberbullying Research Center, 59% of U.S. teens have experienced cyberbullying, much of which occurs via mobile devices.

Given these concerns, it's no surprise that lawmakers are taking action. At least 14 states have enacted laws or regulations restricting cell phone use in schools. These regulations vary from complete bans during school hours to limiting use during specific times like class or exams.

Even though the evidence suggests that curbing cell phone use could lead to safer, healthier, and more academically focused environments for our students, I oppose outright cell phone bans in schools. These bans are a lazy solution to a complex issue.

While I believe that cell phones don't belong in the classroom, I also believe policies that outright bans phones do these kids a grave disservice. These devices are not going anywhere. Once our kids graduate from high school, they will enter college or the workplace with no guardrails on their tech access at all. Instead of taking phones away, we should be giving them the necessary tools to manage their use later in life. Regulate and limit during school hours, instruct on appropriate use, and discipline those kids who break the rules.

Schools should be educating our children on the responsible management of technology. Instead, these prohibitions abdicate that responsibility, kicking the can down the road for universities and employers to handle.

What are your thoughts on cell phone bans in high schools? Is it a step in the right direction, or are there better ways to manage the impact of technology on our youth? Head over to LinkedIn and answer my poll question to weigh in on this important issue.

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

The 8th nominee for the Worst Employer of 2024 is … the dirty dog

If you name your business "Bark If You're Dirty," maybe you get the sexual harassment lawsuit you deserve.

The pet store just agreed to pay $340,000 to settle an EEOC lawsuit that the agency brought on behalf of class of female employees.

The allegations of repeated sexual harassment are for the dogs.

Meteorologist fired for 'sharing recovery journey publicly' raises issues of disability discrimination

"Thank you for going on this journey with me despite the yucky medical stuff I have going on. I'm happy to announce I am 9 months sober!"

That's what local television meteorologist and personality Hollie Strano wrote on her personal Instagram last month. Eleven days later, her employer, WKYC/Tegna, fired her. (The "yucky medical stuff" she referred to is ovarian cancer.)

"I believe the actions of WKYC and Tegna demonstrate the stigma surrounding addiction that so many in our community experience every day," Strano shared after her termination.

I believe this goes beyond stigma; it looks like disability discrimination.

WIRTW #728: the 'season 3' edition

This week marks a first in the three-year history of The Norah and Dad Show — the podcast I co-host alongside my 18-year-old daughter. It's the first episode we recorded in which we both weren't under the same roof.

I was in the study in our home, and Norah was in a study lounge in her college dorm. 

What started as a nice way for me to bond with my teenage daughter has now transformed into a recorded discussion of me keeping up with everything going in the life of my collegiate daughter. I am stoked that she wants to continue recording these shows, and we plan on doing so every two weeks.

You can listen to this week's episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, Overcast, the web, and everywhere else you get your podcasts. And while you're there, hit the subscribe button to make sure you get new episodes delivered to you when they drop every other Tuesday.

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

How many chances does an employee get under a "Last Chance Agreement"?

When is a Last Chance Agreement not a "last chance" agreement? When the 6th Circuit reviews it, apparently.

In Moore v. Coca Cola Bottling Co., the 6th Circuit held that an employee's last chance agreement, signed after the employee tested positive for marijuana, did not bar his subsequent discrimination lawsuit when terminated following yet another positive test.

The LCA stated, in relevant part, "Moore releases and forever discharges the Company … from any and all liability of any kind whatsoever, relating to his employment with the Company, arising prior to the date of this Agreement[.]"

The 80/20/30 Rule is official a zero

The Department of Labor's "80/20/30 Rule" for tipped employees is dead.

That Rule broke down the work of tipped employees into 3 different categories of work:

1. Tip-producing — Work that "provides service to customers for which tipped employees receive tips."

2. Directly supporting — Work "performed in preparation of or to otherwise assist tip-producing customer service work." Think rolling silverware, filling saltshakers, or cutting garnishes.

3. Not part of the tipped occupation — Work that is neither tip-producing nor directly supporting, such as cleaning bathrooms.

This is what allyship looks like

"Please know that there is a more than insignificant chance that a lesbian prepared your food last evening. A gay man might have mixed your drinks. A trans woman may have trained your server to give you such great service. A person who identifies with -- get this -- they/them pronouns may have sat you at your table."

That was just a part of the scathing comment the executive of The Original Vinnie's left on a customer's Google review, which used a gay slur to express his displeasure with the perceived sexual orientation of others in the restaurant during a recent visit.

The FTC's noncompete ban is DOA

It was only a matter of time before a federal court blocked the FTC's noncompete rule, which would have banned virtually all noncompete agreements on a federal level. The odds were high it would be a Texas federal court, and also high that it would be a nationwide injunction.

That's exactly what happened yesterday.

Judge Ada Brown of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas entered a nationwide injunction blocking the rule from taking effect a mere 15 days before its effective date.

WIRTW #727: the 'college' edition

Saying goodbye is never easy. It's that much more difficult when you leave your child.

Yesterday, we dropped our oldest off at college for the first time.

It's one of those moments that you know is coming but never really feels real until you're in the middle of it. And yesterday I was smack dab in the middle of it. As I gave Norah one final hug and watched her walk away with a mix of excitement and nerves, I felt my own a flood of emotions — joy, nostalgia, and yes, (more than) a little bit of heartache.

I also felt a lot of pride. Pride in the confident adult she has become. And pride in my wife and I for our success in completing one of our most central tasks as parents.

As Norah walked away from us last evening, we were all in tears. She FaceTimed me four hours later to let me know that she was happy and was going to be okay. So am I.

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

The interactive process is a two-way street

The interactive process for disability reasonable accommodations is a two-way street, requiring participation from both the employer and the employee. If either party fails to participate or withdraws from the process, that party will likely lose in a subsequent ADA failure-to-accommodate lawsuit.

A recent case, Wilson v. Dept. of Mental Health & Addiction Services, decided by the 6th Circuit, serves as an example.