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 1/9/2022 we saw that a trucking firm is to pay $500K in sex discrimination settlement. The suit filed by the EEOC alleged that Stan Koch and Sons Trucking discriminated against women truck drivers because of their sex. And how did they disparately discriminate? Various pre-employment, post-offer testing (as listed in the post) that was not job-related and consistent with business necessity. When conciliation efforts failed, the EEOC filed suit. A federal judge ruled in favor of the EEOC on liability; the judge’s findings are in the post. After that, the parties came to an agreement on damages and other equitable relief which was approved by the court on December 6, 2021. The settlement involves monetary and other relief as noted in the post. And this case was not an outlier as the EEOC recently won a similar case against Schuster Co., a trucking company based in Iowa, for using the same physical abilities test.
TAKEAWAY: This post is a good lesson on how NOT to use pre-employment, post-offer tests! Get legal assistance to be sure your tests, and the way you plan to use them, are legally compliant.
The post on Monday 1/10/2022 told us that a Court rules employee was fired for insubordination, not gender discrimination. One would think it’s easy to fire an employee for poor performance, right? Not so when the employee is a member of a protected class and thinks they are the victim of discrimination. Here Hilary Grubbs was a mold setter and the only female member of her crew. Issues arose between Grubb and her supervisor; she was suspended after she failed to follow his instructions and violated procedure. Then it got worse. The post notes what happened when he tired to correct her. She was fired. But (of course) it did not end there. She alleged she was fired for being a woman. Her basis for that is also in the post. She ended up suing the employer for gender discrimination. She was unsuccessful. How the court analyzed what she claimed as the basis of the discrimination is in the post. Also, the court said she had not proven that male counterparts received preferential treatment (why is also in the post).
TAKEAWAY: Document document document – when employees make mistakes or are insubordinate – and evenly follow and enforce policies.
The post on Tuesday 1/11/2022 warned that SCOTUS seems wary of ban on state aid to religious schools (and what this might mean for you). First, in case you could not get to the post, here is a link to it in another format: http://ow.ly/ac3250Hvlem . This case ( Carson v. Makin) was argued in early December and from the arguments and questions, it seemed that the Supreme Court might be ready to move toward requiring states to pay for religious education. A majority of the justices indicated that they would not allow Maine to exclude religious schools from a state tuition program. Previously the Court has said that states may provide aid to religious schools along with other private schools. But the question in the case is different: can states refuse to provide aid to religious schools if it is made available to other private schools? Ok, so let’s go back to the background and see how this case got to where it is now. Maine requires rural communities without public secondary schools to arrange for children’s education by signing contracts with nearby public schools or paying tuition at a private school within certain limits (noted in the post). The state pays for the education in either of those cases. But here 2 families sued because they wanted the state to pay for them to send their children to religious schools. How did a lawyer for the state characterize the point of the law? See the post. Some of the comments made or questions asked by the justices are in the post. This case is being looked at as very similar to Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue decided by the Court in 2021 (the ruling is in the post). The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Roberts, said that the state Constitution’s provision barring aid to schools run by churches violated the federal Constitution’s protection of free exercise of religion. But how that case might be distinguished from the Maine case is noted in the post – and may be crucial, especially in light of the answers given by the state’s attorney in response to some of the justices’ questions (again, see the post). But there is more. The 2 schools to which the plaintiff parents want to send their children, at taxpayer expense, openly discriminate against homosexuals, transgender individuals and non-Christians. How that plays into the case is also in the post.
TAKEAWAY: The facts of this case, and especially the answers provided at oral argument, probably do not make this a good case on which a bedrock decision will rest. But the Supreme Court is highly protective of religious freedom and acts taken in violation of that freedom will be strictly scrutinized (such as here).
The post on Wednesday 1/12/2022 told us what to know about buying a condo or home in any planned community/HOA. Condominiums can be more affordable than single-family homes, especially if you consider amenities and included outdoor maintenance. But that is not the end of the road. There are other important things to consider before buying. First, know if the residence is part of a condominium or homeowner association (both of which are types of planned communities). If so, what that means is noted in the post. And if so, there will be a monthly or other periodic fee for the services provided by the association. And you will be bound by the Governing Documents, both as they exist when you purchase and as to any amendments made after purchase. How an association operates is discussed in the post – and should be an important part of your consideration before purchase.
TAKEAWAY: Rule #1: read the Governing Documents. And take them to a community association lawyer to ensure you know what you will be committing to before you sign on the dotted line.
In the post on Thursday 1/13/2022 we learned that a condo association bans banning signs. The declaration governing the condos prohibited residents from displaying signs supporting political candidates or promoting religious or moral beliefs. A neighboring association has a similar prohibition that was challenged earlier in 2021. She displayed a BLM sign and was challenged. The ACLU sued; the decision there, and the basis for it, is noted in the post. And there is more: in 2019 a federal court blocked a city from enforcing a similar ordinance (see the post for its text/contents). The language of the restriction in the association at issue is in the post – and may be a good roadmap for other associations to follow.
TAKEAWAY: Planned community life in action! Again, what the Governing Documents say at the time you purchase the home is not necessarily what they will say during the entire time you own the home, so get assistance from a community association lawyer to know your rights and obligations and those of the association.
The post on Friday 1/14/2022 reaffirmed that long COVID is destroying careers – and leaving economic distress in its wake. COVID has upended the lives and plans of many and for far longer than expected once diagnosed. Tiffany and her boyfriend and their infant lived in his grandmother’s basement for free to save money for a place of their own. She caught COVID over a year ago. She has not been able to return to work. How she describes her condition now is in the post – and not necessarily different from a large portion of the 50 million other COVID survivors with continuing symptoms. More exact statistics are in the post. So what happens to those with long COVID? There are health/medical insurance problems as noted in the post – and those may spill over in to the workplace. But employers too must deal with the fallout form long COVID as they want the employees back at work, but the employees have a slow recovery. Some of their symptoms are listed in the post; the federal government has given it a name (post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 or PASC) and NIH is spending billions to study it. But that doesn’t help employers now; most must try to accom-modate the medical condition pursuant to the ADA and those that don’t have a requirement to do so often want to in order to preserve the employment relationship. Some examples of accommodation for COVID long haulers are in the post. And for those whose employment ends? Many have filed for long-term disability under private policies (resulting in many denials – one example is in the post) and Social Security disability (the staggering number in the last year is also in the post). But that doesn’t help the employers who need them at work.
TAKEAWAY: Employers must know their rights and obligations and those of their employees relative to the long-term effects of COVID. Consult an employment lawyer.
Finally, in the post yesterday 1/15/2022, we read about how an heiress who ‘played a strong role’ in financing Jan. 6th rally/riot is thrust into spotlight. Eight days before the events of January 6, 2021, a Trump donor living in Tuscany (yes Italy) wired $650,000 to 3 organizations that helped stage and promote the events. Julie Fancelli, 72, is the daughter of the founder of the Publix grocery store chain. Some details of her personal life are in the post. But now she is in the public headlights – and the House committee is investigating. The organizations to whom she gave money on December 29, 2020, along with the amounts, are listed in the post. Fancelli has not responded to phone calls or emails from the Washington Post since August 2021. What else she has not done is in the post. And what about Publix, a fast-growing supermarket chain? See the post. In the weeks prior to January 6th, Fancelli send frequent emails to relatives and friends with links to the talk show of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. How the money was funneled is revealed in the post. Why Fancelli, who had been planning to attend the January 6th event, did not go is also in the post. A Republican familiar with her donations said she had an assistant make contact with Jones in his Austin office to find out how she could support Trump’s attempt to undermine Biden’s victory. And what of recent comments by some of Fancellis’ relatives? See the post. And for more of her many and years-long connections to the RNC and Trump and his family, see the post. The fallout is even making people cease shopping at Publix.
TAKEAWAY: Politics can have an effect on employment: here, if more shoppers stop going to Publix as a result of the political efforts of one of its stockholders, it will begin to lay off employees and the rest of the dominoes may soon follow (at one or more locations).
York, Pennsylvania 17403