Skip to main content

What I’ve Been Reading This Week


While I was going to brief a case about a recent hostile work environment lawsuit, I think it is better suited for some light reading to end the week.  I caution readers that while no two hostile work environment claims are the same and each one requires a fact intensive analysis, it is important to remember that sometimes isolated (or limited) instances can still create a hostile work environment.

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



Let’s call this a first world problem situation.  Many readers likely have some version of a work from home setup since Covid first started or perhaps a hybrid setup in recent months.  With the surge in remote work, many workers have taken to trips, vacations, cruises, etc. to enjoy a bit of downtime while also working.  As this article from USA Today notes, there can be hiccups that happen with some remote work setups, including when making a transatlantic trip on a cruise ship.  I highlight this particular article more for the humorous (it not stress inducing) situation the writer experienced in trying to get some work done during the trip.



Recently, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether a six year old (who was the son of a supervisor and grandson of the employer’s two owners) could create a hostile work environment when he uttered the “n word” several times in reference to a black employee.  While the district court had ruled in favor of the employer in the summary judgment stage, the Court of Appeals reversed that ruling and remanded the case back to the district court.  I refer readers to the attached opinion for a more in depth analysis.  To call this a unique case, in the context of a young child creating a hostile work environment, is an understatement.

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

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

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