Author: HR Daily Advisor Staff

News Notes: Employer To Pay $5.5 Million To Settle Misclassification Charges

The U.S. Department of Justice and Time Warner Inc. have reached a $5.5 million settlement to resolve a lawsuit charging that since 1990 the publishing giant has misclassified employees as independent contractors or temporary workers, causing them to be denied benefits including health insurance, pensions and employee stock ownership. The company did not admit liability, […]

Leave Policies: Why You Can’t Automatically Terminate A Disabled Employee Whose Leave Runs Out

Zenaida Garcia-Ayala was working as a secretary for drug manufacturer Lederle Parenterals Inc. when she was diagnosed with breast cancer. Lederle held her job open during several disability leaves while she underwent multiple surgeries, chemotherapy and ultimately a bone marrow transplant. But when Garcia-Ayala’s leave finally ran out, the company fired her. She then filed […]

Wage And Hour: Workers Charge Employer Didn’t Calculate Overtime Correctly; Helpful Pointers

Calculating overtime is usually a straightforward process of multiplying the worker’s regular hourly rate by one and a half. However, a recent Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case illustrates that the computation is more complex if you pay an employee a flat rate per day. That’s because you need to figure out what the hourly […]

Temporary Workers: Union Sues Ventura County For Using Temps

In the latest example of the trend toward challenging the use of temporary workers by government and private employers, Ventura County’s largest labor union, the Service Employees International Union, has sued the county. The union charges that the county paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in the past year to temporary workers in clerical, maintenance […]

News Flash: Employer Ordered Not To Relocate To Mexico

One day after employees voted to be represented by a union, Quadrtech Corp., which employs 118 minimum-wage jewelry assemblers at a Gardena factory, announced plans to move its operations to Mexico and lay off the workers. But a federal judge found that the timing of the move suggested it was an anti-union action and issued […]

Accommodating Employees: Court Overturns Verdict For Colorblind Applicant, But New State Disability Bias Rules Could Change Outcome Of Similar Cases

A California Court of Appeal has thrown out a $307,000 verdict for an applicant who was turned down for a deputy sheriff job because he was colorblind. But as we’ll explain, the outcome might have been very different—and more costly for the employer—if the case had been decided under the new state anti-discrimination rules that […]

Arbitration Of Disputes: Court Upholds Mandatory Arbitration Without Employee’s Signature Or Advance Acknowledgment; Impact On Employers

Following on the heels of a recent California Supreme Court ruling that approved mandatory arbitration agreements for employment disputes, California appellate courts continue to enforce arbitration provisions between employers and employees. In the latest case, a California Court of Appeal required the arbitration of an employment claim even though the employee had never signed an […]

Retaliation Claims: Court Says Employers Can Now Be Sued For Taking Action That Negatively Affects Co-Workers As Well As Complaining Employees

It’s not news to employers that it is illegal to retaliate against an employee who complains about discrimination or harassment. However, in a new decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has expanded the range of what could be considered retaliatory. Employers can now be held liable not only for actions aimed at the complaining […]

Employee Benefits: New EEOC Guidance Covers Benefit Differentials Based On Disability And Pregnancy, Part 2

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently issued new guidelines explaining how federal employment discrimination laws apply to employee benefits. Last month we examined the rules regarding age discrimination. This month we look at the EEOC guidelines dealing with disability and pregnancy discrimination.