Skip to main content

Employment

Viewpoints

Filter by:

Attendance May be an Essential Function of the Job

April 23, 2012 | Blog | By Martha Zackin

This case tests the limits of an employer’s attendance policy. Just how essential is showing up for work on a predictable basis? In the case of a neo-natal intensive care nurse, we conclude that attendance really is essential. 
Read more
There has been much written about the NLRB rule requiring employers- even those without unionized workforces- to a notice about union rights.  Click here, here, here, and here for earlier blog entries.  On April 17, 2012, the United States Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit barred enforcement of the rule, at least for now, while litigation is pending.
Read more
California employers, and employers with California employees, have been waiting for the California Supreme Court to decide Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, regarding the scope of an employer’s duty to provide meal periods.
Read more

Job Applicants Asked for Facebook Passwords

March 21, 2012 | Blog | By Martha Zackin

News outlets are all a-twitter about the practice of some employers to ask applicants for their Facebook login and password information, so they can have a “look around” as part of the interview process. Click here and here, for sample stories. The ACLU has weighed in, with the following statement:
Read more
“Caregiver responsibilities” is not a protected category under federal fair employment practice laws, meaning that it is not unlawful to discriminate against individuals with caregiving responsibilities.
Read more
The NLRB’s new notice-posting requirement is one step closer to reality as the United States District Court for the District of Columbia has, in National Ass'n of Manufacturers v. National Labor Relations Board, dismissed a claim by various business groups claiming that the NLRB had overstepped its rulemaking authority in requiring the notice.
Read more
We have written before about the EEOC’s position that inflexible leave of absence policies may violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Read more
Some people just can’t catch a break.  In recent years, this was certainly true of Michael Boitnott, an employee of Corning Incorporated.
Read more

Update: Who Owns a Company's Twitter Account?

February 9, 2012 | Blog | By Martha Zackin

On January 5, we posted a blog entry about the case of PhoneDog v. Kravitz, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.  In short, during his employment with PhoneDog, Kravitz  used a PhoneDog twitter account (@PhoneDog_Noah) to disseminate information on behalf of the company and to promote its services.
Read more
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the “Board”) released a report providing important guidance to employers on drafting social media policies that comply with its interpretation of labor laws. The report draws on several recent cases addressing employer policies limiting the use of social media by employees, and builds on a similar report issued last fall.
Read more

Retaliation: 2012 and Beyond

January 26, 2012 | Blog | By Martha Zackin

Retaliation claims are here to stay. According to charge statistics recently released by the EEOC, retaliation claims rose to an all-time high of 37,344 in fiscal year 2011, and were included in 37.4% of all charges filed with the agency.
Read more

Reminder: Include GINA "Safe Harbor" Language in FMLA Forms

January 24, 2012 | Blog | By Martha Zackin

Employers with 50 or more employees in 20 or more workweeks in the current or preceding calendar year, including joint employers and successors to covered employers, must comply with the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”).
Read more
In a case of first impression, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA” or the “Act”) protected a pregnant worker who was fired after she requested leave, despite the fact that she was not eligible for FMLA leave when she made the request, because she would have been eligible at the time
Read more
In yet another controversial move, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that employers violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) when they require non-management employees, as condition of employment, to waive their rights to pursue class, collective or other joint claims regarding their wages, hours and working conditions in court
Read more
Viewpoint Thumbnail

California Wage Theft Protection Act UPDATE

January 6, 2012 | Blog | By Martha Zackin

We recently reported about the new California Wage Theft Protection Act (“Act”) that went into effect on January 1, 2012. On December 30, 2011, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”) published its "Frequently Asked Questions" (“FAQ”) regarding the new Act and its notice requirements.
Read more
These days, many employers sponsor social media accounts, whether on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, or other social media sites. Of course, the “company” itself cannot post to an account, so the task always falls on one or more employees to post entries and monitor the accounts.
Read more
In addition to the California Wage Theft Protection Act, which you can read about here, and thanks to AB 22, California employers will be ringing in the new year with a new California Labor Code provision, Labor Code Section 1024.5, and an amendment to California’s Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (CCRAA), Civil Code Section 1785.20.5.
Read more
The NLRB has postponed the implementation date for its new notice-posting rule three more months – from January 31, 2012 to April 30, 2012. The rule would require businesses to post notices apprising workers of their right to unionize.
Read more
Employers should take notice of a recent case out of the Southern District of New York, Raniere v. Citigroup, Inc., 11 Civ. 2448, 2011 WL 5881926 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 22, 2011) (Sweet, J.), in which the court concluded that a Fair Labor Standards Act collective action waiver included in an arbitration agreement is unenforceable as a matter of law.
Read more
The start of a new year often means new laws for California employers to follow, and new administrative burdens for them to bear. The start of 2012 will be no exception.
Read more
Sign up to receive email updates from Mintz.
Subscribe Now

Explore Other Viewpoints: