Basic Employment Laws Involved in the Hiring Process
LAW 629 - Employment Law
Arizona State University
April 2, 2024
When firm undertake proper hiring practices, they reduce the legal risks,
lower the costs of the process, and raise the chances that the practices
would contribute positively to their productivity. Nevertheless, making
improper decisions during hiring could result in adverse outcomes for the
organization, including the fact that it could attract legal scrutiny to the
organizations involved. In line with the legal considerations that managers
should make during their staffing procedures, this paper analyzes the
employment laws that guard both the employer and the employee, ranging
from anti-discriminatory laws, to the types of questions that should be
asked during the interviewing processes, to other regulations. Overall, the
paper finds and reports that the labor laws that govern the hiring process,
much as they have some levels of protection on the hiring institutions, they
tend to protect the job candidates more than they do to the employers.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
Anti-discriminatory laws are the most critical of the labor legislations that
Human Resource Managers, HRMs, should observe during their staffing
procedures. Precisely, according to Walsh (2015), job applicants are
protected by the federal laws against discrimination during the hiring
activities based on a collection of benchmarks, such as religion, disability,
age, pregnancy, gender, national origin, and race. The federal legislative
framework sets forth a collection of anti-discrimination laws, which are
founded on the primary labor laws of the country. According to Twomey
(2017), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 1981 of the 1866
Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Immigration Reform and Control Act,
the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Labor Relations Act, the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, the
Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act
found the employment laws of the US. While the listed laws deal with
diverse issues concerned with employment, they collectively bar
employers from discriminating against specific groups of workers.
Notably, the listed statutes in the preceding paragraph cover specific types
of employees, which means that some of them could be left out.
Nevertheless, the legislation against discrimination is made stricter by
state and local laws that could specific addition groups of employees that
are protected by the mother statutes. For a hiring organization to be
included in the federal employment legislation, it should hire a specific
number of workers, which relies on the types of employers and the type of
discrimination under consideration (Ford et al., 2014). In this case, one
should note that local and state laws cover smaller employers that do not
meet the number of workers that are specified under the federal legislative
framework.
Notably, workers are categorized by the existence of employment contacts
or collective bargaining agreements, and in the absence of the two, an
employment-at-will would be applied in the distinction of employees.
Managers should understand that employment-at-will could be
terminated freely by either an employee or employers for any form of
reason with or without the issuance of notice, as long as the associated
state, local, or federal law is not breached (Walsh, 2015). In any case,
workers are assumed to be at-will until an employment contract creates a
different relationship between the employees and their employers.
Interestingly, when the employer and employees are bound by contracts,
the relationship between the two parties is subject to an interpretation of
the terms and conditions contained in the agreement (Ford et al., 2014).
Another category used in determining whether the employment laws
apply to specific cases is whether the employer belongs to the public or
private sector, whether the employees are termed workers or independent
contractors, and whether the same workers are exempt or not exempt
from overtime.
The reported findings of this research seem to suggest the criticality of
employment agreements in determining the relationship between
employers and workers, which raises the question of whether any state,
federal, or local laws mandate the existence of written employment
agreements entered between workers and employers. According to Walsh
(2015), written agreements are not mandatory since federal laws covering
employment do not direct employers to furnish their workers with specific
types of information. Nevertheless, some state and local legislations could
mandate that employers include specific information in their written
employment contracts. Another critical issues for consideration
concerning the hiring process of companies in the US concerns whether
any specific terms are implied into employment contracts by law. The latter
cited literature suggests the flexibility that the legal framework allows
employers to negotiate the employment terms and conditions that would
shape their relationship in future. The same literature suggests that
employers are always obliged to exercise good faith and fair dealings while
constructing the employment contracts. Other terms could be implied into
implied or express contractual terms according to the applicable local and
state laws.
Another interesting finding is the fact that labor laws in the US set the
minimum employment terms that should be presented in the employment
contract. Precisely, according to the provision of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, employers have the obligation of pay their covered workers the
minimum wage set by the federal legislation framework, including
overtime as compassion for the number of workers that such employees
shall have been on duty beyond the minimum forty per week.
Furthermore, most states and local authorities around the country have
enacted legislations that concern mandatory breaks, overtime, and the
minimum wage.
Employers should also understand the extent to which the conditions of
collective bargaining govern the employment terms and conditions. In this
case, it should be known that the National Labor Relations Act is in charge
of collective bargaining. The volume of employment agreements that
collective bargaining covers, however, has reduced over the recent years
even though that are more prevalent in some regions of the country and
employment sectors than they are in others (Twomey, 2017). It is also
useful noting that bargaining employment terms for inclusion in the
employment contracts happens at company level, and they happen
between the employees and employers of their representatives on typical
situations. However, in some peculiar cases, bargaining occurs at industry
or regional levels or between employers and worker unions.
Alongside the specific laws and provisions by state, federal, and local laws
concerning the terms and conditions of hiring, the laws identified
previously protect employees against the possibilities of being
discriminated against during the interviewing processes. Precisely,
employers are barred from asking specific questions that would drive them
into making biased hiring decisions when they interview their job
candidates. The employment laws set the classes of questions that
employers should never ask job candidates during interviews, which
include whether they have children or they have the intention of having
some, their marital status, their race, religion, sexual orientation, age—
apart from inquiring with the intention of understanding whether the job
applicants meet the age limit under which they could legally be
employed—disability, citizenship, and other questions that may concern
the drug and alcohol use of the job applicants (Ford et al., 2014). In some
cases, applicants may raise questions related to the classified topics, which
calls on the need for the employers to discuss them with the perspective
that they could potentially affect the hiring decisions.
The labor laws of the US also set the standard procedure that covered
institutions should take while hiring new employees. The first step,
according to Walsh (2015), is to obtain the federal employment
identification numbers from the Internal Revenue Services for each of the
new workers. The cited literature suggests that the next step would be to
register the new employee with the employment departments of the
specific states before they proceed to set up the payment systems of the
employees that would ensure that the workers comply with their tax
obligations. The employers would also be required to obtain their worker
compensation insurance, prepare illness and prevention plans that would
be submitted to OSHA, and other relevant procedures.
Conclusively, the employment laws that employers should observe during
the hiring process appear to champion for the rights of both employers and
their employees. On a large part, however, the regulations guard against
the possible infringement of worker’s rights, especially through combating
discrimination. The companies, apart from having a few provisions that
protect them from employees, are obliged to ensure that they do not
exploit their new employees, and that they provide standard employment
terms as defined by the relevant state, federal, and local laws in the US.
HRMs should always be aware of the legal implications of their hiring
decisions because they could affect the corporate image and result in
financial costs in mitigating the legal issues.
References
Ford, K. E., Notestine, K. E., Hill, R. N., & American Bar Association.
(2014). Fundamentals of employment law . Chicago, Ill: ABA Tort and
Insurance Practice.
Twomey, D. P. (2017). Labor & employment law: Text & cases . Mason,
Ohio: Thomson/West.
Walsh, D. J. (2015). Employment law for human resource practice . Nelson
Education.
