Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


Some of you may have read the Fifty Shades of Grey book or went to see the movie the past few weeks.  I came across a rather timely article on the topic that I wanted to lead this "What I've Been Reading This Week" post with.  I do want to suggest that employers be mindful that allowing employees to openly discuss this book and/or movie is a potential hostile work environment claim waiting to happen...

As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week.


Fifty Shades of Grey & the Workplace

Suzanne Lucas has a good article on how the new Fifty Shades of Grey movie can lead to a sexual harassment lawsuit and what employers can do to head off the issue.  For those who do not know, there are some rather "suggestive" parts of the book that may be appropriate for a book club discussion, but not fit for the workplace.  Suzanne included a few ideas on what employers can do to limit potential liability when this topic is brought up in the workplace by other employees.


The Brian Williams Situation: A Lesson For Employers

Joe Lustig writes several good blogs each week that I enjoy reading through when I have a few spare minutes.  This week was no exception.  He has a good note on what employers can learn from this situation; namely to document important conversations and incidents immediately after they happen, rather than trying to remember the details after the fact.  This one is definitely worth a read for employers. 


Denying Employment for Falsifying a Job Application?

We have all heard it at one time or another:  a job applicant "fudges" the information they list on the job application and the employer finds out about it.  The question then becomes, ok, so now what?  Nick Fishman has a couple good thoughts on the topic and highlights that at the end of the day, it is still legal to reject a candidate for falsifying an application (so long as the appropriate steps are taken to comply with an adverse action process.


California Invalidates Meal Period Waiver Rules for Healthcare Workers

This is one of the better California related employment law blogs I read and recently, they had a good article on a ruling from the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District in regard to meal period waiver rules for healthcare workers.  The case, Gerard v. Orange Coast Mem'l Med. Ctr., clarified that healthcare workers who work shifts of over 12 hours have a right to unpaid, off duty meal periods of at least 30 minutes.  Go ahead and check out their write up for additional information on the ruling.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more