2019 Webcast Subscriptions Now Available!
|
|
If your company employs 15 or more employees, watch this case! You know that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 you must provide a "reasonable" accommodation for an applicant's or employee's religious practice or observance. A reasonable accommodation (today) is one that does not cause an undue hardship, previously defined by the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) as one that is more than a "de minimis" cost. That standard or threshold is much lower than for reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Another case
is making its way to SCOTUS and presents three questions to the Court:
- whether an accommodation that merely lessens or has the potential to eliminate the conflict between work and religious practice is “reasonable”...or must an accommodation fully eliminate the conflict;
- whether speculation about possible future burdens is sufficient to meet the employer’s burden in establishing “undue hardship,” ... or must the employer demonstrate an actual burden; and
- whether the “undue hardship” simply means something more than a de minimis cost.
The answer to any one of these questions could have a great impact on employers' obligations under the law. Even the Court described the case as one that presents, "questions of great importance to all employees of faith—questions at the core of how to define 'reasonable accommodation' and 'undue hardship' in Title VII.” Stay tuned. I
In the interim, if you want to learn more and missed the January webcast, "
When Worlds Collide: Religion & Faith in Today's Workplace
,"
click here
. ($25 pp and still provides 1.25 HRCI/SHRM credits).
|
|
FMLA: No Time to Celebrate
|
|
February 5th marks the 26th anniversary of enactment of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Twenty-six years, but employers still struggle to comply with the law and its regulations. Why? Often, it's a lack of communication. Other times, it's a lack of understanding of all that the law requires. Sometimes, it may just be a matter of impatience. Take a
recent case
. A manager tells her staff that while she's out, employees are to report any absence or lateness to another manager. An employee, who had been taking intermittent FMLA leave subsequently advised a supervisor of her absence one morning, not the assigned manager. The employee was then fired, in part for failing to follow a direct instruction. The employee sued (surprise!). The employer's defense was that the firing was not for taking FMLA leave; it was for failing to follow a direct instruction. Plus, the employee had some work performance issues. The court wasn't buying it. First, the court had a bit of trouble separating the failure to give proper notice of an absence from the absence itself. As for performance issues being a factor, the court reminded us, "The question here is not whether [the employer] had additional reasons for the discharge, but whether [the employee's taking] FMLA-protected leave was used as a negative factor in her discharge."
Lesson learned
? Remember, the taking of FMLA leave does not have to be
the
reason an employee is fired for the employer to be liable. it need only be
a
reason. The court also reminds us, "An employer's good faith or lack of knowledge that its conduct violates FMLA doesn't protect it from liability." Oops. Don't let this happen to you.
Join us
on February 27th for the next monthly webcast, "
FMLA Foibles and Faux Pas.
'"
Click here
for more information or to register.
|
|
The Government Shutdown: A Voice for Small Business
|
|
You'd think we'd be used to this. This is the
21st
government shut down since 1976. It's happened under Democrat and Republican Administrations. The second and third longest were under the former and lasted 16 and 21 days. So, let's drop the political posturing.
I write this to speak for the private sector employers and their employees who are not working. Their pay is not deferred. They will not receive back pay. They may not even have a job. Small business owners who are federal contractors are resilient but overlooked. I hear their stories, trying to find work and pay for their employees while navigating myriad wage and hour and other compliance issues.
To every business that is giving free goods, products and services to federal workers, I challenge and ask you to support private sector employees, who are no less adversely impacted.
To Senator Tina Smith (D-MN) and my own Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), I applaud your effort to recognize the impact to the private sector, by (Co)Sponsoring the
Fair Compensation for Low Wage Contractor Employees Act
.
While I hesitate to support a remedy that imposes more fiscal responsibility upon taxpayers, I do urge all sponsors of the bill to consider the impact to those excluded by this bill. Stand in the shoes of the small business owner. Can you imagine the employee relations debacle when you tell your team that only those making below a certain amount or working on certain contracts will get back pay? Now, that's what very inclusive, is it?
|
|
|
It's That Time! Post OSHA Summary!
|
If you employ 11 or more employees and are not otherwise
exempt
, it's time to post the OSHA
300A Summary
from February 1st through April 30th. And if you don't?
Take a guess. If you are required to and fail to post the OSHA Summary Log, how much is the maximum monetary penalty? Do you think it's:
Click here
to answer the question and be automatically entered to
win a
FREE
registration to a webcast
. And, if you are an employer with 250 or more employees, mark your calendar for March 2nd if you are required to electronically file your OSHA 300A.
Click here
for more information.
|
|
|
A SHRMStore
Great 8 Best-Seller
8 Years in a Row
!
Thank
YOU
!
|
|
Upcoming Events, Seminars & Presentations
|
- Wednesday, February 27th - "FMLA Foibles and Faux Pas'" Click here for more information or to register.
|
|
This publication does not constitute the rendering of legal advice. You should consult your company's legal counsel for guidance on any matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
