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 5/12/19 we learned that when attendance is essential, intermittent extended leave is not reasonable. (I noted I could easily see this being decided the same way in PA.) So what happened? The Plaintiff was a full-time paraprofessional for a school system. The employer documented her absenteeism and tardiness. A meeting was held to discuss the problems and a warning was given. A year or so later, there was another meeting and another warning. Shortly after that, she requested intermittent leave for the next year for a serious health condition. The reason the request was denied is in the post. She was eventually suspended without pay, but not discharged. She sued on the bases in the post. The court wasn’t buying it, even on appeal. It noted comments about absenteeism in most of her performance reviews. The eventual finding is also in the post and makes complete sense.
TAKEAWAY: Know what is and is not an essential function of the job; ensure that the job description is correct and current.
The post on Monday 5/13/19 was in keeping with the same theme and taught that 24/7 availability can be an essential function. Here, a law-enforcement employee had PTSD from military service. How it manifested is in the post. He asked for numerous accommodation requests, but they were denied. The last incident is in the post; it preceded termination. He sued for ADA violation. The courts did not rule in his favor. Why is in the post.
TAKEAWAY: Let’s repeat what we said for the prior post: know what is and is not an essential function of the job; ensure that the job description is correct and current.
The post on Tuesday 5/14/19 asked: Can an association mandate removal of life-size bronze eagle from backyard. In this case, the eagle was displayed by a veteran. He said the ARC okayed it (with conditions noted in the post, which he agreed with). Then the Association overruled and told him to remove it.
TAKEAWAY: Life in a planned community is all about abiding by the Governing Documents, including the process to be followed for various things including landscaping and architecture – know the rules of the community.
The post on Wednesday 5/15/19 noted an employee called “stupid Egyptian” gets to go to trial. No surprise. Curious about the facts? Nashaat was assistant director of risk management for a hospital. He said evals for 4 years said he was “fully competent”, but changed under a new supervisor. Nashaat alleged discrimination because he is Egyptian. What the supervisor said is in the post. The trial court entered judgment in favor of the employer on the basis set out in the post. The appellate court reversed because of the factual dispute. Surrounding the supervisor’s statement.
TAKEAWAY: Loose lips can sink not only ships, but also employers. Train employees what to say and not to say.
In the post on Thursday 5/16/19 we read about a $322K settlement in EEOC suit for racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation. The other party was a seller of officially-licensed sports merchandise. It allegedly had a racially divided workplace and subjected employees to racial slurs like that in the post. And then HR got into the act; see the post. Despite complaints, management did nothing. And now the employer is paying out much more than nothing ($322K and more in the post) to settle the suit.
TAKEAWAY: We seem to keep repeating ourselves: train your employees what they can and cannot say.
The post on Friday 5/17/19 noted “Fat shaming” costs employer big bucks. It’s the bases on which this suit was NOT filed to which employers should be alert … A restaurant server in Vegas filed suit, claiming that a sign (with the language in the post) was left out, despite repeated requests to management. The trial court granted judgment for the employer (the Bellagio), but the appellate court allowed the count for intentional infliction of emotional distress go forward. Then the jury got into the game, awarding him $500,000. The post author then analyzes the IIED claim element by element and comes around to …
TAKEAWAY: Teach employees what they can and cannot say and be careful that things don’t cross the line to disability discrimination.
Finally, in the post yesterday 5/18/19, we entered a dangerous game for employers: wage and hour law. Why? Because a loss can be so costly, employers should try to reduce if not eliminate risk for liability. The possible branches on how to do that are in the post.
TAKEAWAY: Before you roll the dice with wage and hour law, contact an employment lawyer to assist you.
York, Pennsylvania 17403