Follow Us
twittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutube
Subscribe to the BT Currents Blog

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Recent Posts
The Legal Stuff
BT Currents - Hot Topics in Employment Law
0 0

27 Jul 2015 Employee Can’t Count to 15 Under ADA Using Volunteers or Other Companies’ Employees

  One of the most significant ongoing type of employment issues is the treatment as employees of individuals the employer thought were not — interns are found to be entitled to back wages, nominal independent contractor status is repeatedly challenged in court and temporary agency workers are at risk of being treated as the customer’s employees as well.  Workers found to be employees are entitled to the protections of the various employment laws.   A secondary but sometimes equally important implication of employee status is…

READ MORE
0 0

22 Jul 2015 Enhanced Discrimination Protections Potentially on the Horizon for Federal Employees

The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a bill (H.R. 1557) that would afford additional anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation provisions to federal employees.  H.R. 1557, introduced in March of this year and titled the Federal Employee Antidiscrimination Act of 2015, amends the Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002, placing stringent requirements upon federal agencies to be transparent and accountable when investigating and rectifying complaints of discrimination or retaliation. The bill passed by a landslide in the House of Representatives this week, with…

READ MORE
0 0

21 Jul 2015 UPS’ Employment Policies Come Under Scrutiny, Again

Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a class action lawsuit against the United Parcel Service (UPS), claiming that the company had repeatedly failed to accommodate certain religious beliefs. Specifically, the complaint alleges that since 2004, UPS has refused to hire or promote certain individuals whose religious practices conflicted with the company’s dress code. Under UPS’ dress policy, male employees who either have a supervisory position or who have customer contact are not allowed wear beards or grow their hair below their collars….

READ MORE
0 0

13 Jul 2015 “Perceived as” Religious Bias Claims? – A Federal Court in Michigan Says “Yes”

Recently, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Michigan denied a company’s motion for summary judgment that Title VII and Michigan state law do not prohibit discrimination on the basis of perceived religion. Kallabat v. Michigan Bell Tele. Co.¸2015 BL 194351, E.D. Mich., No. 2:12-cv-15470. Despite the citation of other six federal district court decisions from other states (IL, KS, NC, NY, OH and TN) holding that Title VII does not cover a perceived religion claim, the court held that they would not bar…

READ MORE
0 0

06 Jul 2015 Performance You Can Measure Is Best Defense, FMLA Case Demonstrates

I often find myself counseling clients that the more measurable a performance issue is, the easier it is for the employer to prove that issue is the true, nondiscriminatory reason for a termination or other job action in the face of a discrimination or other employment claim. Sales employees almost always have measurable data about their performance, which seemingly provides an objective basis for employment decisions taken against individuals whose sales number are lowest. Such decisions are not bullet proof; for example, the employee may…

READ MORE
0 0

22 Jun 2015 Does Being “Perceived As” Muslim Support A Title VII Claim? One Court Says Yes

Readers will know that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is distinctive among discrimination statutes in that it protects not only people who are disabled but also those regarded as disabled, as discussed here and here.  The foundation of a Title VII sex discrimination in the language “because of sex” also creates potential gray areas as to exactly who the law protects.  Generally, however, a person either is in a protected class or is not.   This recent case from a Michigan federal court flags…

READ MORE
0 0

19 Jun 2015 Do Not Seek DNA Information From Employees…

Do not seek DNA information from employees … even for non-discriminatory purposes. That seems to be the lesson learned from a recent federal court decision in Georgia.  A food distribution company in Atlanta, Atlas Logistics, requested several employees to submit to cheek swab genetic tests when human feces deposits were repeatedly discovered in one of its warehouses. Although the offender(s) were not identified by the genetic tests, a forklift operator and a deliveryman who submitted to the testing later sued under the federal Genetic Information…

READ MORE
0 0

17 Jun 2015 Medical Marijuana Users Get Smoked by High Court of Colorado

Becoming the first state to decide the much-anticipated issue, the Colorado Supreme Court unanimously held that a statute barring the termination of workers for engaging in lawful activities outside of work does not prevent employers from firing an employee for failing a drug test, despite having a state license to smoke marijuana for medical purposes. The reason: smoking marijuana is still unlawful under federal law. The case, Coats v. Dish Network, can be found here.   The plaintiff – a quadriplegic customer service representative for…

READ MORE
0 0

15 Jun 2015 If the payroll company says it’s an employee …

I wrote here and here earlier this year about the importance of employers carefully reviewing who they consider to be an independent contractor so the employer avoids the various legal problems that can arise as misclassifying workers who should be employees as independent contractors. A recent decision from a federal court in Florida is another lesson in this. In Rezendes v. Domenick’s Blinds, two workers – an installer and a seamstress – won summary judgment from the court in a wage/hour case that they should…

READ MORE
0 0

12 Jun 2015 Recent Case Illustrates How Types of Associational Discrimination Claims Can Play Out in Litigation

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects applicants and employees from discrimination based on their relationship or association with an individual who has a disabling condition. Generally speaking, there are three types of associational discrimination claims:   Expense discrimination: Employer fears that association with disabled person will be costly to the employer. Disability by association: A relationship with a disabled person means employee may also be disabled. Distraction: A relationship with a disabled person will prevent the employee from completing job responsibilities.   A recent…

READ MORE