Skip to main content

What I’ve Been Reading This Week


For those who are tired of spending the past few days reading about the Mueller report, Russia, Democrats, President Donald Trump, etc., I hope this week’s post can serve as a nice change of pace.  There are a good mix of topics, ranging from hostile work environments to equal pay matters all the way to a recent FMLA case.

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


Distinguishing Between A Hostile Work Environment & A Bad Boss

Earlier this month, Johnny C. Taylor, Jr. fielded a few HR related questions for a USA Today article.  One of the questions had Johnny address the differences between a hostile work environment and "just" working for a bad boss/bully.  While the laws can differ in each state (and some states have even adopted anti-bullying laws), there is no federal law that directly prohibits bullying.  On the other hand, some workplace actions, communications or behaviors that are pervasive or serious enough to disrupt work can create a hostile working environment and be found to be in violation of federal law.  As Johnny notes, any employee experiencing an untenable work environment should make their HR department aware of any concerns.  The sooner the complained of conduct is identified, the sooner HR can look into the matter and take appropriate action.


Paycheck Fairness Act Clears House; Next Stop: The Senate

Earlier this week, the House passed the Paycheck Fairness Act with a final vote of 242 - 187.  The bill seeks to close the loopholes in the Equal Pay Act of 1963.  For those that are not aware, the Equal Pay Act stipulates that employers cannot differentiate salary based on gender unless a number of factors, such as seniority, merit, and work level, come into play.  The Paycheck Fairness Act would go one step further and ban employers from asking applicants how much they made in previous jobs, would get rid of employer rules that prohibit employees about their salary information, and require employers to be more transparent about how much they pay employees.  One of the more pivotal portions of this legislation is the requirement that employers would be required to share salary data with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), so that the EEOC could monitor potential discriminatory practices.  It is worth noting that this is the eleventh time the bill has been brought up and the second time it has cleared the House.  However, with a Republican controlled Senate, even if a Republican or two jump across the aisle, I would suspect the Paycheck Fairness Act will again falter.


Reminder to Employers: The FMLA Allows For Leave to Care For Adult Child

Using a recent settlement by the University of Northern Iowa, HRDive published an article earlier this morning to remind employers that the Family Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") allows employees to take protected leave to care for an adult child.  As some readers might be aware, the FMLA provides that covered employers must allow eligible employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid, protected leave within a twelve month period for family and medical reasons.  Notably, the FMLA can be used to care for a child age 18 or older, per guidance from the Department of Labor.  Employers, while ensuring compliance with the FMLA, make sure note to forget some of the more nuanced portions of the Act or risk being in an untenuous position, such as the University of Northern Iowa...

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

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

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more