Menu

Showing 7 posts in Policies.

California Adds New Notice Requirement for Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault and Stalking Victims

Employers, another notice provision has taken effect in California. Beginning on July 1, 2017, employers with at least 25 employees must now provide written notice to new employees that explain the rights of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. More specifically, the required notice mandates employers notify new employees of their rights under Labor Code Sections 230 and 230.1. These sections detail the following points: More ›

Wisconsin Appellate Court Holds Management Policy Does Not Negate At-Will Employment Relationship

At-will employment is the default rule in Wisconsin. Employers may terminate for any reason or no reason at all.  However, that relationship can be overridden by contract, in some cases inadvertently, through employee policies and other post-employment agreements. In a case that came as good news for employers, last week, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed that it would not read a policy as overriding the employment at-will relationship unless the policy evidenced an intent to do so. More ›

DOL Challenges Injury and Accident Reporting Policy Under OSHA’s Anti-Retaliation Rule

OSHA’s new anti-retaliation rule went into effect on December 1, 2016. The purpose of the new rule was to clarify what OSHA considered “the existing implicit requirement” that an employer work-related injury and illness policies be reasonable and not deter or discourage employees from reporting injuries. Since that time, employers and lawyers alike have waited to see what types of policies OSHA would target under the new rule. The Department of Labor’s recent complaint filed in the Eastern District of Wisconsin sheds some light on that question. More ›

Déjà vu all over Again: NLRB Rejects Employer's Handbook Policies

You may have noticed that the NLRB has been coming down pretty hard on employment policies, practices and handbooks lately. They've added yet another decision to the arsenal this past month.  More ›

Employer's Overbroad Confidentiality Language Leads to SEC Investigation and Penalty

Most employers have confidentiality provisions in their handbooks, employment agreements, or other employment procedures manuals. Employers might want to take a minute to review those provisions in light of some recent criticisms articulated by the National Labor Relations Board in the March 18, 2015 General Counsel's Report, and today, by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). As a result of problematic confidentiality language, one employer found itself facing an enforcement action from the SEC and a steep monetary penalty.  More ›

NLRB: Employer’s Overbroad Social Media Policy Violates Employees’ Rights

In its first decision involving an employer’s social media policy, the National Labor Relations Board (Board) found that an employer's policy violated employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The Board reasoned that the policy was written in overly general terms and therefore had “a reasonable tendency to inhibit employees’ protected activity.” This decision follows a series of social media reports issued by the Board over the past year, and appears to confirm what many employers had feared based upon those reports: the Board appears ready to reject all broad prohibitions on what employees may say online. More ›

Employees’ Delay in Complaining of Harassment lead to Dismissal of Claims

Five mid-level supervisors brought suit for racial and sexual harassment against their employer based upon purported physical and verbal misconduct by a higher-level supervisor. It turned out, however, that the employees had delayed almost eight months before reporting the misconduct, despite the fact that the employer had a “zero tolerance” policy regarding this type of misconduct, had policies in place which set forth the complaint process. The employer only learned of the supervisor’s alleged misconduct after the employees filed EEOC charges, and at that time, the employer undertook a prompt investigation. The employees claimed that they didn’t complain earlier because their complaints would have been ignored and/or because they feared retaliation. More ›

Search
Subscribe via Email