5 Laws That Job Descriptions Can Violate
In yesterday’s CED, consultant Mary Anne Kennedy offered tips for making job descriptions a valuable tool; today, her take on legal issues related to job descriptions.
In yesterday’s CED, consultant Mary Anne Kennedy offered tips for making job descriptions a valuable tool; today, her take on legal issues related to job descriptions.
“When people are not performing well, it’s often the case that they aren’t in the right job, and that often stems from basing the hire on an inaccurate or inadequate job description,” says consultant Mary Anne Kennedy.
What might trigger chemical sensitivity for employees in the workplace? Here we provide a list of possible triggers and resulting symptoms, as well as common scenarios employers may need to face regarding employees with sensitivities.
Recent rulings by both the California and U.S. Supreme Courts have changed how employers need to approach so-called “mixed-motive” cases, where employers need to understand their potential liability in making hiring or firing decisions about employees who may be in position to bring legal action for employment discrimination.
Millions of individuals suffer from allergies or asthma, which can be exacerbated by common environmental agents, such as pollen, dust, latex, nuts, ink, toner, cleaning supplies, fingernail polish, lotions, cologne, and more. Since many of the offending substances are regularly found in workplaces, employers must understand their duty to accommodate those who develop an aversion to odors and allergies in the workplace
HR metrics are very useful to measure progress, but which metric matters depends on who you're talking to. Different stakeholder groups care about different things. As such, it's important for HR professionals to evaluate what is important to each of their stakeholders to see what you should be measuring.
BYOD, which stands for "bring your own device," is becoming an increasingly more popular plan in the workplace. It can provide employers an added connection to their workforce, allowing employees to efficiently address important matters quicker than in the past. Allowing access to the employer's network via the employee's own personal devices may result in greater overall efficiency and productivity, fewer electronic devices for the employee to keep track of, and the ability to use the most up-to-date devices and features if they choose.
In a mixed motive case, the evidence shows that employer has taken adverse action for a combination of both legitimate and unlawful reasons. When a plaintiff in a Title VII case proves that a protected category played a motivating part in an employment decision, the defendant/employer may avoid a finding of liability only by proving by a preponderance of evidence that it would have made the same decision even if it had not taken the plaintiff's protected characteristic into account.
Proving retaliation on the part of an employer is not always cut and dry. In fact, some retaliation cases have made it all the way to the Supreme Court owing to the ambiguity of what is required to prove such a case.
Most employers know that retaliation is prohibited under Title VII at the federal level for employees who have engaged in protected activities. California employers also have to stay in compliance with employee retaliation protections under FEHA. Unsurprisingly, the standards applied in California differ from those applied at the federal level.