Lobbying Affiliate: MML&K Government Solutions
{ Banner Image }

Employment Law Blog

When It Comes To Employment Issues, Choose A Firm That Thinks Outside the Cubicle.

Contact Us

250 Character(s) Remaining
Type the following characters: november, papa, three, whisky, three, romeo

* Indicates a required field.

Stay Connected

RSSSubscribe to this blog via RSS
Join us on LinkedIn
Facebook

Archives

Categories

McBrayer Blogs

Showing 10 posts in Job Requirement.

Updated & Enhanced EEOC Enforcement Guidance – What Does it Mean for Employers and Pregnant Employees?

November 24, 2014
Posted In EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employee Handbook, Employee Hazards, Employment Law, Employment Non-Discrimination Act ("ENDA"), Human Resource Department, Job Requirement, Maternity Leave, Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Young v. UPS

In 2013 alone, 5,342 discrimination claims were filed alleging pregnancy discrimination. The result – employers paid out over $17 million in monetary benefits last year. In fact, the EEOC’s statistics do not include monetary benefits obtained through litigation; thus, employers likely paid out a significant amount more than $17 million. To avoid adding to this figure, employers must pay particular attention to pregnancy discrimination in the workplace, be mindful of what is required to comply with federal and state law, and take precautions to ensure that no discriminatory practices exist in the workplace. More >

Getting “Sandwiched” Into a Non-Compete Agreement

November 6, 2014
Posted In Employee Contracts, Employee Forms, Employee Handbook, Employee Training, Employment Law, Hiring and Firing, Human Resource Department, Job Description, Job Requirement, Non-Compete Agreement

The Huffington Post recently reported that Jimmy John’s, the national sandwich chain, requires its workers to sign strict non-compete agreements. The agreement was disclosed as part of a lawsuit by employees, and many in the employment industry are wondering if such an agreement is really necessary for the company’s minimum wage workers. These agreements are usually saved for high-level executives or those subject to proprietary information – not the guy behind the counter making a sub. More >

Tags: employment agreement, employment law, Jimmy John, Non-compete agreements

Sixth Circuit Vacates Decision On Telecommuting Accommodation

October 1, 2014
Posted In ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (“ADAAA”), Americans with Disabilities Act, Employee Hazards, Employment Law, Job Description, Job Requirement, Telecommuting

In May, we wrote about the Sixth Circuit’s interesting decision in Equal Opportunity Commission v. Ford Motor Co., wherein the Court expanded the instances in which a telecommuting arrangement would be considered a reasonable accommodation for disabled employees in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).[1] More >

The Sixth Circuit Broadens Telecommuting as a Reasonable Accommodation For Disabled Employees

By Luke A. Wingfield on May 2, 2014
Posted In Americans with Disabilities Act, Employment Law, Hiring and Firing, Human Resource Department, Job Description, Job Requirement, Telecommuting

In a new decision involving the Ford Motor Company handed down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the Court has expanded the instances in which a telecommuting arrangement would be considered a reasonable accommodation for disabled employees in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).[1] In Ford Motor Company, Jane Harris, who worked in a supply purchasing position, was terminated from her position after she asked to perform her job primarily via telecommunication in an attempt to control her unfortunate symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome. There was no dispute that she possessed a disability affecting a major life activity. So the discussion revolved around whether she could do her job via telecommuting and whether Ford’s proposed alternative accommodations were acceptable. Ford denied the request for telecommuting even though it did allow those in positions such as Harris to work from home on a limited basis. According to Ford, Jane’s physical presence at the workplace was critical to the group dynamic of the resale-buyer team and thus her request was unreasonable. The district court sided with Ford, granting the employer summary judgment as to claims of failure-to-accommodate under the ADA and retaliation. The question on appeal was whether Harris created sufficient questions of fact for her case to be allowed to proceed. The Sixth Circuit agreed that Harris did present sufficient questions of fact for her claim to be considered and in so doing appeared to send a message to employers that they need to be more flexible in considering telecommunication as a reasonable accommodation. More >

Digital “Off-the-Record” Conversations?

March 3, 2014
Posted In Employee Handbook, Employee Misconduct, Employee Performance Reviews, Employment Law, Human Resource Department, Internet & Media Law, Internet Defamation, Job Requirement, Online Account Protection, Online Defamation, Social Media, Social Media Policies

Employers and business professionals are no strangers to “off-the-record” conversations and closed-door meetings. In today’s world, though, many long for a way to converse online without a permanent record of the conversation existing somewhere out there in Internet-land. New apps have responded to this need; think Snapchat (the popular app that allows users to set a predetermined time for how long recipients can view their photos) for text messaging. TigerText, Wickr, and Confide are just some of the self-destructing text apps that have recently emerged. Businesses, however, should proceed with caution when using these – they could not only present an air of impropriety but also be a legal hazard. More >

Fighting the Flu (and Liability) in the Workplace, cont.

September 25, 2013
Posted In Chenzira v. Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, EEOC, Employee Hazards, Employment Law, Job Requirement, Mandatory vaccination policies, Sick Employees

On Monday, we examined the basic concept of employer-mandated flu vaccinations.  Generally speaking, employers may require at-will employees to get a flu shot and may terminate an employee based upon a refusal. The right to terminate, however, is not without limitation,  and a recent case on this issue instructs that certain protected rights and classifications likely must be considered prior to termination. More >

“Why Does She Get To Do That?” Handling Questions about Employee ADA Accommodations

April 17, 2013
Posted In Americans with Disabilities Act, Employee Handbook, Employment Discrimination Laws, Employment Law, Human Resource Department, Job Requirement

The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) requires any employer with fifteen or more employees to provide reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities, as long as doing so does not result in “undue hardship” to the employer. A reasonable accommodation can be any change in the work place that helps a person with a disability to enjoy equal employment opportunities. The ADA has very strict guidelines about when and how an employer may inquire about an employee’s disability. What happens, though, when a non-ADA employee asks you, the employer, why another employee is receiving perceived preferential treatment? More >

Employee’s Role in Timekeeping Emphasized in New Sixth Circuit Opinion

February 11, 2013
Posted In Employment Law, Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Hiring and Firing, Human Resource Department, Job Requirement, Kentucky Labor Cabinet, Wage and Hour, White v. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corp.

A recent court ruling by the Sixth Circuit, which includes Kentucky, has received extensive publicity for its holding relative to employer’s obligations for employee lunch breaks. In White v. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corp., 11-5717 (6th Cir. App. 2012), the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the employee “bears some responsibility for the proper implementation of the FLSA’s overtime provisions […] an employee cannot undermine his employer’s efforts to comply with the FLSA by consciously omitting overtime hours for which he knew he could be paid.”[1] More >

The Particulars of a Job: Description vs. Requirements

October 26, 2012
Posted In Employee Contracts, Employee Performance Reviews, Employee Personnel Files, Employment Law, Hiring and Firing, Human Resource Department, Job Description, Job Requirement

In most cases the quality of the workforce determines the success of any business. As we discussed on Wednesday (10/24/12), there are five essential elements of a job description but there is a compelling need to focus specifically on requirements. A job description defines the duties, tasks and responsibilities of a position, creating a framework for hiring the right candidate. The description is used in marketing and promotion to attract new talent to the company. The requirements set the stage for digging deep into the details of the position and reflect the culture of the company.  They have emerged as the strategic details that can set the candidates apart and make it easier for HR managers to look for an employee to specifically match the employee’s long-term goals. More >

Five Essential Elements of a Good Description

October 24, 2012
Posted In Employee Contracts, Employee Personnel Files, Employment Law, Hiring and Firing, Human Resource Department, Job Description, Job Requirement, Wage and Hour

Most companies of any significant size have, and should have, written job descriptions for each of its employment positions.  The process of crafting these descriptions should start before the hiring process begins to fill positions, for good job descriptions are essential to identifying the various employee attributes needed by an employer. However, job descriptions historically are also one of the most widely used pieces of evidence in employment claims by plaintiffs.  For this reason job descriptions need to be well written and carefully crafted to mitigate the risk of creating a document that can be used against an employer later in court. More >

Lexington, KYLouisville, KYFrankfort, KYFrankfort, KY: MML&K Government Solutions