Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


Had a tough time narrowing down the articles I wanted to post this week.  One of my favorites dealt with how employers can avoid retaliation claims.  Some of the suggestions are common sense but often times those are the ones that employers do not even consider or simply forget about.

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


Urban Outfitters Looking for Volunteer Workers

This note from The Hollywood Reporter has an interesting note on Urban Outfitters' request for weekend volunteers to staff one of its fulfillment centers in Pennsylvania.  As Urban Outfitters clarified in its press release (after the employee-only e-mail got leaked), the company was only allowing salaried employees to volunteer.  Apparently, no hourly employees would be allowed to volunteer "in order to ensure full compliance with all applicable labor laws and regulations."  Smart call.  And what do these salaried workers receive for volunteering?  Lunch and transportation to the fulfillment center.  Who said there's no such thing as a free lunch, huh??


Hiring Based On Appearance: Good or Bad Idea?

Robin Paggi has a very good article on whether an employer can (or should) make a hiring decision based upon how an applicant looks.  As Robin advises, it is important to review the relevant caselaw and statutes in a particular state first.  With that being said, she provides employers with a solid framework in which to consider when making this type of hiring decision.


Transit Benefits Coming to D.C. in January 2016

The Wage and Hour Defense Blog has an interesting note on a recent change in Washington, D.C., effective January 1, 2016.  By that date, covered D.C. employers (those that employ 20 or more employees) must offer their employees one of three qualified transportation benefits.  In essence, these employers will have to offer their employees a transportation benefit or risk a fine ranging from $50 to $2,000.00.  As the article points out, D.C. employers need to act quickly as this new law becomes effective at the start of next year.


Six Ways Employers Can Avoid Retaliation Claims

I always make an effort to read some of the blog posts over at the California Employment Law blog.  This is another good article for employers to review as Jeffrey Polsky offers six suggestions on how employers can avoid retaliation claims.  One of the better suggestions (and one that is often overlooked) is for employers to document everything.  Having a paper trail of documentation can come in handy, especially if the complained of conduct did not occur recently or employees who have knowledge of the situation have either left the company or simply do not remember.

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