ICYMI: Our Social Media Posts This Week – June 10 – 16, 2018

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 6/10/18 we read about a suit alleging AT&T’s absence policies discriminate against pregnant women. Remember the Pregnancy Discrimination Act? Yeah. Cynthia and Katia were both fired for things related to pregnancy. Why? Because of how AT&T’s policy works – see the post. And the interaction between several federal laws identified in the post.

TAKEAWAY: Even enforcement of policies is good, but it must also be legally compliant. Consult an employment law attorney to stay within legal bounds.

The post on Monday 6/11/18 told us about 4 pitfalls to avoid when responding to a charge of discrimination. Suits happen after the administrative phase has been concluded, but the latter is important. Employers should not just wing it when responding to the EEOC (or PHRC) – they should take certain steps, including not providing too much information, not providing too little information, and 2 others listed in the post. The employer’s response may indeed be used against it in any later trial, so paying attention to the tips in the post can be helpful.

TAKEAWAY: Know how to respond to an administrative charge of discrimination Consult legal counsel to start your defense now before it’s too late.

In the post on Tuesday 6/12/18 noted a former employee sues city for employment discrimination. Not quite the typical office furniture … Stanley filed suit last July. And the former City administrator resigned suddenly. Are the 2 related? Not according to the Mayor. The background facts are in the post and include a City Council member trying to get dirt on someone. The dirt had to do with a certain type of “office furniture” detailed in the post, a smoke bomb, and more (see the post). After reporting what he found, Stanley was written up. Then he found out … see the post.

TAKEAWAY: Don’t make a possibly bad situation worse by taking adverse action without valid, legal support.

The post on Wednesday 6/13/18 was about enforcing HOA and condo association rules by imposing fines (and asked if you know what is allowed under PA law). We all know that the Governing Documents (Declaration, Bylaws, and Rules/Regulations, must be evenly enforced. If there is a violation, it must be addressed. As noted in the post, one mechanism to address violations is a system of fines. As noted in the post, applicable state law must be followed (as long as the provisions of the Governing Documents).

TAKEAWAY: The Association should always consult with its legal counsel to ensure that actions comport with the Governing Documents and the law.

In the post on Thursday 6/14/18 we asked: do asthma sufferers have viable FMLA claims if terminated? Maybe. In this case, Dighello was a router and dispatcher. She had to work long shifts with no breaks. After 4 years, she took ill and missed 2 days of work. The post details the next things that happened, through to her discharge. Suit was filed. The court analyzed what might constitute protected FMLA leave in the context of an interference claim. The court also dealt with the retaliation claim. Both are discussed in the post.

TAKEAWAY: Make sure you think about all related facts and timing when being asked to provide an FMLA accommodation. And talk to an employment law attorney before taking adverse action.

The post on Friday 6/15/18 was about age discrimination in hiring & recruitment: EEOC on ADEA. Don’t let the #MeToo movement overshadow your concern for age discrimination. The post lists 2 examples (which should sound familiar to readers of this blog). More are in the news every day. Don’t make yourself a defendant.

TAKEAWAY: Make sure age has nothing to do with any adverse action you take against an employee or applicant.

Finally, in the post yesterday 6/16/18 we saw that a former JPMorgan employee filed suit for racial discrimination. As the post notes, “an attempted ‘Harlem shuffle’ has backfired.”  JPMorgan deals with people of means – and people of limited means. JPMorgan tried to transfer Francis from an affluent branch to a low-producing Harlem branch. How it broached it is in the post. Francis got upset. He was not calmed by what his supervisor said next (in the post). The suit also has more support for his claim (as in the post). Francis sued.

TAKEAWAY: Train your employees on how to act, what factors to use for decisions/actions, and what not to say. It might help you in case of suit.

Skip to content