If you’re like me, you can’t help laughing when you walk into an elevator and notice there’s no button for the 13th floor. (Spoiler Alert! Pressing 14 actually takes you to the 13th floor in those buildings!) I’m also probably tempting fate by admitting I think black cats are beautiful and I have no problem stepping on cracks in the sidewalk.
This week’s Fridays with Frank is guaranteed to be the best one yet. I was wearing my lucky socks when I wrote it!
How is the EEOC Like A Weather Vane? Last week I reminded you that employers with 100 or more employees have until the last day of the month to file their EEO-1, Component 2 data. While that requirement still stands, this week the EEOC announced its changing direction again (like a weather vane, get it?) and won’t be collecting Component 2 data going forward. Apparently, the original estimate of the financial burden on employers to collect and report the data, $53.5 million, was off by $568.5 million. That’s quite a rounding error!
Termination Letters Aren’t Good Baby Shower Gifts This episode of, “on what planet is that a good idea?” stars two employers with written policies on firing pregnant employees (no that’s not a typo). In her article, How NOT to Handle an Employee’s Pregnancy, my friend, and attorney, Janette Levey Frisch (aka the “EmpLAWyerologist“) looks at two recent cases where the EEOC filed lawsuits against employers for violating the Pregnancy Discrimination Act – which, by the way, has been federal law since 1978!
Perception Is “Regarded As” Reality Remember the old saying about making assumptions? Well, under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), assuming someone has a disability can result in a lot more than looking like, ummm, a donkey. In Best Regards? Regarding an Employee as Disabled Also Violates the ADA, attorney Janette Levey Frisch provides valuable insight into the ADA’s “regarded as” standard.
Is That Your Final Answer? Having multiple versions of why an employee was terminated is at best, a bad employment practice, and at worst, the shifting rationale is viewed as an attempt to mask an illegal motive. Stick to Your Story…, from Bradley‘s Labor & Employment Insights blog, explains how one employer’s shifting rationale for firing an employee soon after she returned from maternity leave led the court to doubt the employer’s entire decision-making process.
Is Calling The Boss A Motherf***er A Problem? Asking For A Friend No problem at all, according to several decisions issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Since 1979, the NLRB has consistently held that profane, vulgar, and racially- and sexually-charged language in the workplace is legally protected. However, as my friend Eric Meyer explains in his blog, The Employer Handbook, the NLRB is reconsidering its stance.
Thanks for spending a small part of your day with me and have a great weekend!
Posted by Frank Cania, president of HR Compliance Experts LLC.
Please feel free to contact Frank at firstname.lastname@example.org, or 585-380-1566 with questions or for more information.
Disclaimer: This content is for informational purposes only, does not constitute a legal opinion, and is not legal advice. The facts of each situation should be considered and analyzed individually. Therefore, you should always consult with competent employment counsel regarding any issues discussed here.
CLICK HERE to learn more about Frank Cania and HR Compliance Experts LLC.