Below is a review of the posts (on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter) from the past week. You can check out the full posts by clicking on the links.
In the post on Sunday 7/29/18 we saw that an IHOP dishwasher was allegedly fired for refusing to join a prayer group. Just not good. Matthew alleged that most of the employees and managers prayed together every day and that they often asked him to join. He declined. What was their response? See the post. Matthew complained to managers. What they did next is in the post. Eventually, he was sent home for refusing to join the group. Matthew then escalated his concerns to the franchise owner (whose response is in the post). He then reached out to corporate but, as of the time he filed suit, had not heard back. He alleges that he was harassed about praying, ignored by managers and then terminated.
TAKEAWAY: Know what is and isn’t allowed or required relative to expression of religious beliefs and religious discrimination or harassment.
The post on Monday 7/30/18 told us a Vegas Club is accused of sex for job scheme. Only in Vegas? So what happened? A cocktail server’s accusation that a Hyde nightclub (at the Bellagio nonetheless!) manager demanded sex and nude photos in exchange for a job and that a manager told her that other servers had sex with managers to get jobs at the club. And what makes it worse? Just see the post. Ick.
TAKEAWAY: Still true: if you wouldn’t want to see it on the front page of the NY Times, don’t put it in writing!
In the post on Tuesday 7/31/18 we saw that an employee fired for applying to move closer to disabled son settled for $100,000. When the company learned that Ashok was considering a transfer to be closer to his son, who was left disabled from an auto accident more than 25 years ago, it took action – see the post. The EEOC then sued on his behalf for violations of the ADA and ADEA.
TAKEAWAY: Don’t act against someone in a protected group without making sure it will not come back to bite you or your purse.
The post on Wednesday 8/1/18 told us that a court refused to remove a verbally abusive Director from office. This decision is from a PA appellate court and so is binding here. This is a community of about 4,500 homes. Kowalski was elected to the Board in June 2016. The rest of the board included seven women and one man. The post lists what he did during the first two months in office and after. The post mentions his rationale. The board admonished Kowalski three times for his conduct. The Association’s attorney got involved; what happened after that is in the post. After only 6 months, the board suspended Kowalski and petitioned the court to remove him as a director and bar him from future service on the board under applicable state law. Why the trial court refused to remove him is in the post. The Association appealed. On appeal, the court reviewed the options available to remove a director and analyzed whether any was applicable on the facts there. See the post for that.
TAKEAWAY: What seems simple may not be when the facts re applied to applicable law – contact us about any thorny issues.
In the post on Thursday 8/2/18 we saw it took $38,000 to settle woman’s pay suit; case centered on youth-lockup job. The EEOC had sued on behalf of a female employee who was paid “significantly less” than a man who held the same position. The suit alleged that the employer violated the Equal Pay Act and Title VII when it filled a facility investigator position vacated by a male employee with a lower-paid female employee. More of what happened prior to the suit is in the post.
TAKEAWAY: Don’t try to pay one gender less than the other for doing the same job – you will be found out and have to pay more than you would have from the start.
The post on Friday 8/3/18 was about 7 ways to screw up the ADA’s interactive process. Read on. Yes, it’s true that an employer causing a breakdown in the process — or refusing to engage in it altogether — can serve as evidence of discrimination. How else can an employer mess up? By not knowing when its obligations to engage begin. By failing to recognize an accommodation request or ignoring it. And 5 more things listed in the post.
TAKEAWAY: Employers must know what their obligations are under the ADA and when they kick in – to make sure there are no missteps, let us help you.
Finally, in the post yesterday 8/4/18, we reaffirmed that the ADA requires focusing on ability, not diagnosis. Don’t make a mountain where there isn’t even a mole hill. Makes sense, right, since the purpose of the ADA is to ensure that someone can perform the essential functions of the job, with or without accommodation. So it follows that it is performance, not any medical diagnosis, which matters. Don’t assume (you know what they say about that!). Don’t step on the “regarded as” landmine like the employer in the post.
TAKEAWAY: We just said it above – know your obligations under the ADA and when they kick in, but don’t go where you don’t have to.
York, Pennsylvania 17403