Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


Given that Senator Marco Rubio finally introduced his paid family leave proposal this week (after several false starts), I think it is appropriate to lead off this post with a closer examination of his proposal.  This one still has a long ways to go before becoming law, but some of the specifics of the bill are worth a read.

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


Senator Marco Rubio Formally Unveils Economic Security for New Parents Act

At long last, Florida Senator Marco Rubio has rolled out his proposed paid family leave plan yesterday, dubbed the "Economic Security for New Parents Act".  I have attached a fact sheet from Senator Rubio's website which breaks down some of the specifics of the plan.  Readers might recall that this proposed paid family leave bill would allow workers to borrow from their Social Security benefits in order to cover their paid leave.  In return for borrowing from their Social Security benefits, these workers would have to delay their right to receive those benefits for a set period once they reached retirement age.  It is worth noting that fellow Republican Senators Joni Ernst (from Iowa) and Mike Lee (from Utah) had originally been in talks to co-sponsor the legislation, however they did not sign on prior to Senator Rubio introducing the legislation yesterday.  Their reason for not doing so?  They apparently could not agree on the details in the bill.  Hmmm.  Somewhat troubling for supporters of this bill, but it is still early in the ballgame here.


Ban The Box Has Turned 20: A Look At Some of the Challenges Going Forward

Jennifer Carsen at HRDive wrote an article earlier this week that noted while ban the box has turned 20 (well, on July 15th that is), there are still challenges that employers face going forward when implementing this initiative.  In her article, Carsen pinpoints several things employers can do to ensure compliance with ban the box laws (as they can vary from city to city and state to state), such as adopting a national ban the box policy that attempts to comply with as many ban the box laws as possible.  Regardless of whether an employee is a national company or only operates within one state or city, this article is worth a review for some well thought out insights.


A Closer Look At Addressing Whether HR Discussions Are Confidential & The Purpose of Exit Interviews

On Tuesday, Johnny Taylor Jr. at USA Today discussed whether an employee's conversation with HR is confidential and what purpose an exit interview actually serves.  As Taylor points out, if an employee raises an issue in a discussion with HR that concerns potential liability for the organization or an issue that could significantly impact the business or other employees, the HR representative is more often than not obligated to discuss the matter with those that need to know within the company.  As a result, a confidential mediation discussion can sometimes result in the discussion not being confidential after all, despite what an employee might think.  Taylor proceeds to address what purpose an exit interview, a discussion that should be highly relevant to both employers and employees alike.

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