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 10/13/19, we learned that employees seeking ADA accommodations do not have to make a formal request. Yes, the employee must actually request assistance (an accommodation), but there are no magic words. In the post, the employee asked for help after returning from a medical leave. What was his supervisor’s response? See the post. He reinjured his back, was fired, and sued for retaliation and failure to accommodate. The trial court’s ruling in favor of the employer was reveres on appeal and the matter sent back for trial. The appellate court’s reasoning is in the post – and makes perfect sense.
TAKEAWAY: Know each party’s rights and responsibilities – and what is needed to trigger them.
The post on Monday 10/14/19 was about US privacy law and employee monitoring: on a collision course? Yes, tech rules, and part of it is monitoring employees, whether to protect assets, safeguard the workplace, or other things noted in the post. Video surveillance, physical searches, and the other means noted in the post were just some of the methods by which monitoring occurred. Now there is GPS monitoring to biometric information and more as in the post. But are there limits? Is it legal? See the post.
TAKEAWAY: Make sure to stay legal when monitoring employees in any way – consult employment counsel to be sure.
The post on Tuesday 10/15/19 told us the EEOC settled a lawsuit filed on behalf of fired African American truck washer for $40,000. In a case close to home (Williamsport PA), the EEOC settled a suit it filed. Holmes was hired early 2014 as a truck washer; he was fired in March 2016. How he claimed he was harassed and discriminated against is in the post. Examples are also given in the post. The employer did nothing in response to Holmes’ complaints. And how it justified his discharge is in the post.
TAKEAWAY: Employers can indeed terminate employees for valid reasons; make sure the validity is established before action is taken or be ready to talk to an employment lawyer.
The post on Wednesday 10/16/19 was about dealing with inaccuracies posted on social media by Association residents. A real issue today. Normally an Association has limited ability to limit social media posts by residents – they have the rights to assemble (on private social media sites) and voice their opinions. The First Amendment is strong but not unlimited. The social media outlet should not make users question if it is an official Association site or not. There are other items listed in the post that should be checked, include whether the post is defamatory or other things in the post.
TAKEAWAY: You can’t stop Association members for exercising First Amendment rights, but you can ensure they are exercised legally Consult a community lawyer if there are questions.
In the post on Thursday 10/17/19 we learned about recognizing an accommodation request under the ADA. Yes, both sides have a duty to engage in the interactive accommodation process. But prior to that one needs to know when that process is to start. There are no magic words necessary to invoke the protection of the ADA. The case in the post is a perfect example. Also, in the post is a good way to broach the subject with the employee instead of assuming an accommodation is needed (and subject oneself to a claim under the ADA’s “regarded-as” prong).
TAKEAWAY: Know when the obligation to begin the interactive process starts – don’t wait to hear the words “ADA” or “accommodation”.
The post on Friday 10/18/19 told us that Miner’s Gems was sued by the EEOC for age discrimination. We told you to read on. Lori was 57, with relevant experience, when she applied for work with the jewelry store. Two recruiters made comments about her age during interviews; what they told Lori is in the post. And led to the suit. For more details, see the post. The employer has yet to weigh in.
TAKEAWAY: Make sure to train your employees, especially managerial-level, as to what they can and cannot say – and what factors can and cannot be considered in hiring and other employment-related decisions.
Finally, in the post yesterday 10/19/19 we saw that Belle Tire is to pay $55K after manager slapped, racially harassed employee. We noted that about the only thing the employer did right here was to settle the suit… So, what (allegedly) happened? An African American employee was subject to derogatory, race-based comments by the store manager. The things he said, including “cricket”, are in the post. And as if that wasn’t bad enough, the comments were sometimes accompanied by demeaning physical contact as noted in the post. The employee complained and was fired shortly after. What happened to the manager? See the post. The suit was settled for the monetary payment plus the other things noted in the post.
TAKEAWAY: As we keep saying, train your managers on what they can and cannot say and do – and make sure they follow the training.
York, Pennsylvania 17403