Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week: HR Edition


There are some readers of the blog who specialize in Human Resources (or are casual "fans" of HR related issues).  Not wanting to disappoint, I thought this would be a good time to dedicate a post to HR related issues.  One of the more interesting articles I read this week had to deal with out of date minimum lifting requirements and the potential liability an employer could experience as a result. 

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


Employers Beware! Out of Date Lifting Requirements Could Spell Trouble

Ben Ford points out the dangers an employer can face with out of date minimum lifting requirements in their job descriptions.  Not only is an employer cutting off a potentially wide range of applicants, but there are potential discrimination claims that could arise from out of date minimum lifting requirements.  As the article notes, the EEOC warns employers that minimum lifting requirements must be "consistent with business necessity".  Given the start of the new year, make sure to take a look at the minimum lifting requirements and make sure they are accurate.



This is a good reminder from Eric Welter over at the Laconic Law Blog about the Colorado Wage Protection Act of 2014.  Under that Act, employers in the state are prohibited from maintaining "use it or lose it" vacation policies for their employees that would deprive an employee of earned vacation time and/or wages associated with that time.  While only a handful of states have adopted this policy (including California, Montana, and Nebraska), it will be interesting to see if any other states follow suit.



For those states which do not prohibit "use it or lose it" vacation policies as noted above, The HR Bartender suggests that employers could offer the option to employees to donate the unused vacation time.  The article notes that at least one organization allows their employees to donate vacation time to a designated charity, such as the American Heart Association.  I have to say I have heard of donating unused airline miles...but I cannot say I have ever heard of donating unused vacation time.  At the very least, it is an intriguing concept.  While this might not be a realistic idea for all employers and employees, it is at option that some might consider offering.


Answers to Several Important Questions In Regard to Pregnant Employees

The HR Specialist has about 20 answers to a host of questions that employers might have in regard to how to handle pregnant employees.  This article covers everything from whether an employer can bar a woman from returning to work for a predetermined period of time after giving birth all the way to whether an employer can count leave taken due to a pregnancy complication against the twelve weeks of FMLA leave for the birth and care of a child.  I highly recommend employers (and employees too!) give this one a review.



It goes without saying that when the exit interview occurs (if an employer actually conducts one, that is), it is often too late for the employer to get a feel for that employee's mindset and the overall workplace culture.  Stephanie Reyes has a very interesting article based upon that notion and instead suggests that employers remain engaged with employees throughout the time an employee works for the company.  Developing a level of trust and an open line of communication so that the employee feels comfortable addressing any issues with the employer is vital to employee retention.  This one is well worth a read.
 

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, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

Happening Tomorrow: Connecticut’s Minimum Wage Increases

For those employers and employees alike in Connecticut, mark your calendars as tomorrow, the minimum wage rate increases in the state from $13/hour to $14/hour. This wage hike comes after Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont had signed Public Act 19-4 into law in 2019 which progressively raised the state’s hourly minimum wage rate every year for five years.  In fact, next year, the hourly wage rate will top out at $15/hour.  Beginning in January of 2024, the hourly wage rate will be indexed to the employment cost index. For additional information:   https://portal.ct.gov/Office-of-the-Governor/News/Press-Releases/2022/06-2022/Governor-Lamont-Reminds-Residents-That-Minimum-Wage-Is-Scheduled-To-Increase-on-Friday
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more