What I would like to talk about is FMLA, particular the portion of FMLA that
covers maternity leave. As a mother myself this is something that is very close to
me and something I feel needs to be fought for a better law or more equality in
my state of Kentucky. For my current company they offer 6 weeks of unpaid
leave for maternity. The federal law says it can be up to 12 weeks but doesn't
require your employee to pay you. As you can imagine the stress of trying to
bring a human into this world then having to go without pay the entire time
could cause some major issues. Not only could this possible leave some mom's
homeless and without food this also puts a-lot of stress on mom's in the sense of
Postpartum depression. Back in 2018 they was a law that stated any employer
with over 50 employees would have to offer at least 6 weeks of paid time off,
unfortunately the law never got passed. However, I do feel like this is something
that needs to be fought for. Also Most fathers don't get any time off for having
a child and have to use vacation just to see their child be born. In my opinion
this is a law that needs to be changed. According to a 2019 article in Harvard
Business Review, well managed diverse groups excel at making decisions and
addressing problems in business. Companies spend large sums of money on bias-
prevention programs, but, according to the article, they seldom deliver the results
that had been hoped for. But managers, as individual leaders, can take steps to
ensure that their teams include and make good use of diverse voices. The article
sets out guidance for day-to-day management and for developing the team. The
authors recommend such things as asking everyone for input and acknowledging
the importance of everyone’s contributions. The authors also say that managers
should explain their rules for training, promotion, and pay decisions, and should
then follow those rules. In a state with at-will employment a firing would be
wrongful if it violates a contract, or if it violates a collective bargaining
agreement, or if it violates an anti-discrimination statute or some other statute, but
probably not otherwise.When firing an employee, an employer has to pay the
employee for any unused vacation time the employee may have. Absent an
employment contract, the employer does not have to provide any severance pay.
(U.S. Dept. of Labor, n.d.).At least a few employers that I know of will give a
fired employee some severance pay, usually at least two weeks' worth. I have
heard of at least one law firm giving associate lawyers six months notice that
their employment will be ending. But, of course, an employer has to be able to
trust an employee if the employer is giving advance notice of a termination. Many
employers want to play it safe by terminating employment immediately instead of
giving advance notice. What I have chose to write about this week is a lawsuit
that Walmart was recently involved in. It was a religious discrimination lawsuit
involving a manager that the company was trying to hire. This potential employee
had his interview and was offered the position. When he accepted the offer he
told his new potential employer that he had some religious reason on why he
needed a certain schedule. The human resource manager started to look at the way
they could accommodate this scheduling dilemma. Once the human resource
manager was done looking at all the ways they could accommodate the potential
employee they decided that all the things they found would cost the company.
They made the decision that they could not reasonably accommodate the new
employees religious needs and that he may want to apply for a hourly
management position, which would be more suitable for his religious needs. The
new employee turned down the suggestion and filed a lawsuit. He lost the lawsuit
because it was proven that Walmart would spend more on hiring this employee
and another employee to accommodate his schedule. This employee used all of the
steps in the legal system but still failed because the laws set in place make it to
where the company has to try to accommodate but when it because a burden to
them they can not hire you. Kelly Phelps, a woman who was a server in a
restaurant in a state park in Tennessee attended a Halloween party at the
restaurant. When the party ended, John Walsh, the assistant park manager, invited
Phelps and several other co-workers to an after-party at his residence on park
property. At that after-party he was intoxicated and he pressed himself against
Phelps and continued after she told him to stop.Phelps and three other women
employees complained about Walsh’s behavior, but Joan Williams, the park
manager, told the women that they had been at fault. Walsh would then smirk at
her in the workplace in what Phelps perceived as an intimidating manner. Phelps
claimed that the state retaliated against her by reducing her work hours and
placing her on unfavorable shifts.Eventually Phelps filed a lawsuit against the state
under the Tennessee Human Rights Act (THRA). That act, like Title VII to the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, forbids workplace harassment and other forms of
discrimination on the basis of sex.The trial court dismissed Phelps’ lawsuit, finding
that the THRA only prohibits sexual harassment “in the workplace,” and that the
conduct complained about had not occurred in the workplace. However, the
Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and reinstated Phelps’s claims.
The appellate court stated that harassment outside of the workplace, “can and often
does spill over and affect the victim’s workplace experiences,” and that the
following factors should be considered: “(1) the proximity in time and space to
the “traditional workplace”; (2) the relationship of the event to the employees’
work duties; (3) the extent to which the employer planned, promoted, or sponsored
the event; (4) the degree to which employees were pressured or encouraged to
attend the event and the number of employees in attendance; (5) the employer’s
knowledge of any pattern of similar harassment by the offending employee under
prior similar circumstances; (6) the extent to which the off-premises harassment
impacted the victim’s workplace experience after it was reported to the employer,
including whether the victim was forced to continue working with the harasser;
and (7) any other circumstances pertinent to the inquiry.” Employment is
something that is very important and glad that we have these types of laws in
our country. Employment laws protect employees to make sure companies our
adhering to overtime pay, hourly pay and being treated fairly regardless of race,
age, gender, religious beliefs and etc. It is important that these laws are in place
because they allow people to be free. In a country where our pledge of allegiance
states liberty and justice for all these laws are significant and should stand by our
pledge.
One particular case where employment law was in place was a cast against
Abercrombie and Fitch in 2015. Abercrombie in the early 2000's was one of the
top fashion designers. I'm not sure of where they are now because I do not hear
too much about them. In this particular case a woman by the name if Samantha
Elauf was denied employment allegedly because her hijab (head scarf) was
considered outside of the companies' dress code policy. (Reuters, 2022) If know
anything about the Muslim belief then you know hijab is not a fashion statement,
Women in the Muslim belief cover their heads covered when outside when in the
presence of other men amongst other things. Some may see a hijab as a fashion
statement because now women do wear head wraps to match their outfits as a
fashion statement. A Hijabs primary use for wearing is for religious beliefs.The
employment law that was that was applied is the discrimination based on religion.
The resolution came once the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a
case against Abercrombie. (Reuters, 2022) The case went to the Supreme Court
and ruled that an employer cannot discriminate because of religious beliefs. This is
also in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (Reuters, 2022).Without these laws so many
people would be held back and not allowed to conquer their dreams because of
what they believe in. So many people could get cheated out of pay because
companies would not have to adhere to labor laws to cover overtime pay or
minimum wage pay. Employers could discriminate and not hire a person because
if the color of their skin. Muslim women would not be able to wear their hijab
at work as a practice of their faith because it is out of the company's dress code.
The issue I chose was the employment of youth in agricultural positions.
Specifically the minimum age to work as what is defined in child labor laws. In
non-agricultural positions the minimum age is 14-15 with a permit. However in
many communities youth have work experience in agriculture younger than the age
of 14. The agricultural section expands the allowable age and states that children
age 12 and under are allowed to be employed in farm work. According to U.S.
Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division (2016) " Under 12 may be
employed outside of school hours with parental consent on a farm where
employees are exempt from the federal minimum wage provisions. These
requirements are published in Section 570.2(b) of Part 570 of Title 29 of the
Code of Federal Regulations".The child labor law for non-agricultural also explain
what is permissible employment for children under 14 even though the laws
require work permits and establish rules for working during non school hours.
Under the FLSA it stated Children Under 14 "Permissible employment for such
children is limited to work that is exempt from the FLSA (such as delivering
newspapers to the consumer and acting). Children may also perform work not
covered by the FLSA such as completing minor chores around private homes or
casual baby-sitting."(U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division ,
2016).Employment law was applied to the resolution by having clear definitions for
the type of occupation the minor will be involved in and in what setting. It also
states that if an employer keeps a record of certification for the youth regarding
which occupation they engage in, it meets sufficient standards. An employee in
New Zealand received an email from his employer saying they needed to meet to
discuss his ongoing role with the company and that the employee could bring a
support person to the meeting. Sensing the meeting would be negative, the
employee hired a clown as his support person.
During the meeting (where the employee was let go from the company), the
clown provided the employee with some humor and lightheartedness.
Whether California law would support an employee’s request for an emotional
support clown as a reasonable accommodation is unclear — but it likely would
require the same individualized assessment as any other disability accommodation
request." There are many issues in employment law in the United States such as
being wrongfully terminated. Someone who is wrongfully terminated can be
terminated for their gender, race, or even religion. I remember an employee was
fired who interviewed as a male and was hired was then fired when they came to
work as a male. That right there is considered being wrongfully terminated.
"Wrongful termination occurs when an employer fires or lays off someone for the
wrong reasons." This is not a reason to terminate someone therefore it is
considered to be wrongful termination. I am sure these types of things happen
often in the United States. Harassment is another issue in employment where
someone is fired because they are the ones being harassed which isn’t fair at all.
As for the employee being fired because of their gender, they sued the company.
The most common issue I have seen regarding harassment is the employee being
fired that is getting harassed especially if they are being harassed by management
because they are the ones that can fire you which make people not want to speak
out.
I found an interesting article that involves employment law, specifically FMLA for
this week's discussion topic. According to the US Department of Labor, FMLA,
better known as Family and Medical Leave Act, entitles an eligible employee to
take unpaid, job-protected leave for family and medical reasons. This case that I
came across involved an employee who was terminated from his job when his
employer found out that he took a vacation to Mexico while he was on medical
leave of absence from work. The employee underwent foot surgery and received a
medical certification from his surgeon that he would need 4-6 weeks of FMLA
leave with a guideline of limited activities post-operatively for recovery. While
recovering, he asked his company if it was ok to go back to work early from his
leave of absence, and was denied due to the fact that he needed another
certification from his surgeon for a letter of back to work status. When the
employee was unsuccessful to get such certificate from his surgeon and learned that
he would not be able to return to work, and while trying to avoid using up all his
vacation time, he asked to be paid under the employer's salary continuation policy,
or disability policy. Since he could not return to work earlier, he decided to go on
his previously planned vacation to Mexico. When he noticed discrepancies in his
paycheck, and was not getting what he though he should be getting paid while on
this leave of absence, he contacted HR. From there, HR discovered he took a trip
while on this FMLA leave of absence, they launched an investigation and ultimately
fired the employee. The employee sued his former employer, and the case went to
trial. As a result, the state high court of Massachusetts found that the employers
made a knee-jerk decision without reviewing the facts, including review of all
medical information provided by the employee from his medical providers, stating
what the employee can and cannot do while on FMLA leave of absence. Therefore
awarding the employee $1.3 million in damages. Currently in the United States, the
federal minimum wage is $7.25/hr as stated on the Department of Labor website.
This is the amount of pay for an employee that is employed by a business that is
not in a state with additional minimum wage laws. Should a state have minimum
wage laws, then the employee would be paid whichever is the higher amount. For
example, in Ohio, the minimum wage law has the current wage per hour set at
$9.30 for employers that have an annual gross of over $342,000. Those that work
a minimum wage paying job will be paid at the state rate opposed to the federal
rate. In recent years the rate of pay for minimum wage, whether it be the federal
or state rate, has been an issue. As stated in an MSNBC news article, the issue at
hand and the question more often being asked is, if the minimum wage pay is
sufficient and "fair" for citizens to live a life outside of poverty without having to
work 100+ hours a week. In 2021 there was talk of the President enacting a law
that would increase the federal minimum wage from $7.25/hr to $15/hr. While this
increase would not fix the huge income gap that at times puts Americans in
extreme housing and food shortage crisis, it could offer some relief. I am going to
discuss the fact of Arkansas being an "employment at will" state. What this means
is that the employee or employer may terminate employment at any moment with
or without cause. This has been used many times over my 13 plus years here. Our
company used this practice again during the COVID pandemic. Ownership had an
addendum added to our handbook stating that it would be a requirement to receive
all vaccines available in order to remain employed. This covered us in the event of
retaliation from an employee also. Employees were given a specific date to provide
proof of vaccines or they were given a pink slip for not following company policy.
Since we are a small privately owned company no laws were broken or even
stretched. I am not saying that I agreed with the decision even though we are a
medical based child care facility but it was what was needed to be done in order
to keep our doors open to be able to provide the proper care for our patients in
need. In April 2021, Illinois amended its Human Rights Act to limit the decisions
that employers can make about the conviction records of employees.
“Under the amended Act, which takes effect immediately, it is a “civil rights
violation” for an employer to use a “conviction record” as a basis for adverse
employment decisions, unless:
There is a “substantial relationship” between one or more of the previous criminal
offenses and the employment sought or held; or
The granting or continuation of the employment would involve an unreasonable risk
to property or to the safety or welfare of specific individuals or the general public.”
This supreme court case highlighted the violation of discrimination laws by
terminating employees for their sexual orientation, specifically for identifying as
homosexual or transgender. While the Eleventh Circuit attempted to dismiss the suit,
the Second and Sixth Circuits found that the cases that involved could not be
dismissed and proceeded further (Schwartz, 2021).
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is prohibited to discriminate
against applicants and current employees based off of race, color, religion, sex, and
national origin. This includes the failure, refusal, discipline, and discharge towards
any employed individual or individuals seeking employment (Civil Rights Act,
1964). According to Schwartz (2021), the court in this specific case held the
position that Title VII extends past gender and sex and should include protection of
sexual orientation and gender expressions.
As a result, the employment law of Title VII allowed the court to rule in favor of
the victims and has now paved the way for higher court resolution by prompting
states to enact subsequent legislation instead of leaving the power in the hands of
local governments (Schwartz, 2021). There are many ongoing issues in employment
law in the United States. As governing and organizational bodies oversee many laws
that have been created there are still daily operating practices that continue to
discriminate against individuals who could have one of many diverse differences that
are not “social norms” of society operate conditioning. One major ongoing
employment law is discrimination and harassment in a workplace environment. “The
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces federal laws
prohibiting employment discrimination” (Laws Enforced by EEOC, 2009/11/21). The
federal law Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a civil rights act
prohibiting employment discrimination. This law prohibits discrimination based on
race, ethnicity, sex, religion, disability, and national origin.
The EEOC protects the people (Civil Rights Act of 1964 discrimination and
harassment employment act) people of various cultural backgrounds should not be
discriminated against directly or indirectly. Direct way means that a person is
completely rejected from the job based on his or her ethnicity, race, color, sex, or
national origin. Indirect way means to harass or slowly remove the person from the
job based on race, color, sex, or national origin of the individual. The EEOC
protects all such diverse types of people. No matter the cultural diversity everyone
should be given equal rights and equal positions irrespective of color, race, national
origin, or sex says this civil rights act.This civil rights employment act was applied
in the resolution in the following way:
·Title VII makes it unlawful to discriminate the people's employment based on race,
color, national origin, or sex when recruiting, hiring, training, or promotion
·Title VII makes it unlawful to discriminate against people based on race, color,
national origin, or sex in the field of goods and services, banking, government
department, transport, or other professional service
This law has been applied to make it illegal for an employer to retaliate against an
individual based on the person who complained about the discrimination and
harassment, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment
discrimination investigation or lawsuit.
In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, No. 17-1618 (S. Ct. June 15, 2020), the
Supreme Court of the United States held that firing individuals because of their
sexual orientation or transgender status violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964’s prohibition on discrimination because of sex. “The Court reached its holding
by focusing on the plain text of Title VII. As the Court explained, ‘discrimination
based on homosexuality or transgender status necessarily entails discrimination based
on sex; the first cannot happen without the second.’” (EEOC, n.d.)
When I was 20 I worked as a manager of a convenience store. I was robbed and
received injuries. I can remember this 23 years later like it was yesterday, however,
it's not so much the incident that I remember as it is the words and actions of the
owner. I was interrogated by him that same evening on how I let it happen. The
next day as I was not feeling up to come back to work, I was injured been at the
hospital all night. But I was advised I would be fired if I didn't. Well, I ended up
getting fired, there was no way I could face the area let alone have people looking
at me and asking what happened as my injuries were visible.
As I grew older and then became employed by a law firm did I understand the
worker's compensation laws in IL. At the time of the incident, I was not aware I
was protected if hurt on the job. I was entitled to file for workers' compensation
as the employer should have been paying into that for coverage of his employees.
For this week’s topic, I would like to discuss the food and beverage industry. Its
overlooked, under paid, and under rated, and cheated. I want to speak about what
I know, what I have seen, and what I have experienced. Working over the period
of breaks, not being paid the correct amount of money that was talked about upon
hire, when it comes to clocking in, to the fifth hour of work, to taking your 30min
break, to when you clock off, and still have work to finish known as your side
work/obligations in food and beverage. You tell me, does that sound fair?
There are a lot of issues to cover in the food and beverage industry. I like would
like to focus on what management tries to pull with the young kids that got their
first job serving food. I have been on both sides of the table, from bartender, to
serving tables, to management. When I managed, the owner in meetings would ask
me why my employers were working over the time specified to work, and needed
more pay? I would tell them it was because we were busy, and we have a little
staff and work still needed to be finished. If you want to cut that time in half,
hire more people. They did not like that, but it was out of my control, unless you
have a lot of people on staff and not worried about paying them. There is more
to the food and beverage industry beside taking a food order and making a drink.
As someone who has been overworked and underpaid I know the anger of working
overtime and not being compensated. A big issue that has always been there but is
starting to be fix now is overtime pay and the limit on the amount of overtime a
week. Every state is different so I will focus on Virginia. In Virginia company
used to be able to violate overtime laws and get away with it fairly easy. For
instance, one week I worked 60 hours for a company. I was only paid overtime
for 12 hours. They said that because one of the 5 days of the work week was a
holiday 8 of my overtime hours went to pay for that day. That made no since to
me as I was supposed to get my paid holiday as well as the additional hours I
worked.
There is however a new law that goes into affect on July 1, 2022. This law states
that and employer that violates the states overtime laws “shall be liable to the
employee for the applicable remedies, damages, or other relief available under
the [FLSA].” This means that if they are found liable they will be responsable for
my extra pay as well as other compensations. This is a very big deal to Virginia
residents.
The United States has come a long way over the past century, but there’s still
work to be done... Much of women’s progress is thanks to RBG and her brave and
tireless advocacy.
Many years ago, women were treated as property, owned by men. Only 102 years
ago (in 1920), women were granted the right to vote. Fast forward fifty years…
RBG was making moves to forever shift the inequalities between men and women
in the workforce, by fighting gender discrimination. One example of this is her
influence in the ratification of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, which identifies
pregnant women as a protected class. In the past, women could have been fired,
demoted, or otherwise harassed for becoming, or wanting to become pregnant. The
Pregnancy Discrimination Act identified these actions as a type of gender
discrimination. “Ruth Bader Ginsburg knew firsthand what it felt like to be
discriminated against purely on the basis of her gender: As one of only nine female
students at Harvard Law in 1956, she was famously asked why she was taking the
place of a man. After she transferred to and graduated from Columbia, at the top
of her class, she could barely get a job. And when she finally landed a teaching
job at Rutgers School of Law in 1963, she hid her pregnancy under her mother-in-
law’s baggy clothes until her contract was renewed.
These experiences would lay the groundwork for a career spent slowly dismantling
gender discrimination in American life and work, and it is for this work that
Ginsburg is most often celebrated. In my experience working in various fields and
having non-exempt and exempt work status; no one cares. Everyone states that there
are laws and organizations to help protect the individual that is being trespassed
however when an individual brings the "breaking of law when it comes to labor or
civil rights" its almost a burden of extreme proof the victim of discrimination,
harassment, or labor law breach to get justice.I am a very positive enthusiastic
morale-boosting employee engagement activist. This is how I fight the fight. I like
being a leader and leading by example. My recent problem has been unable to
secure a position high enough to do my calling. We need people of the light in
higher-level positions than front-line workers occupancy to truly see a change that
is needed. Everyone can talk the talk all day. However, even the most positive
outgoing extrovert may be oppressed and subjected to being ostracized even before
they speak out.If a company advertises and states they are diversity, equity, and
inclusion focused look at the management setup with their diversity. If the
management is STILL "Caucasian only" while other cultures are in other positions
like HR and assistants: don't make the company diverse, equity, and inclusive
focused at all. Some companies don't mind paying the OT when it's set up like
Hebrews working for the Egyptian Pharaohs for bread and water. History is there
for lessons to be learned or situations to be remembered. An individual should
know the audience even when they are desperately trying to take care of their own
family: the ones they love.I am glad to hear that there is a new law pertaining to
non-exempt employees receiving OT however, we will start to see more exempt
positions. A celebration perhaps for a few. Worker's compensation does carry
advantages and disadvantages that goes along with it. Although it may differ in
policies from state to state, it still holds the main pro argument, that it is an
employer paid insurance policy which provides benefits and medical care for
employees who are injured or become ill on the job as a direct result of the job.
I would agree that even though it provides such benefits to injured employees, it
still proves itself to be such a task monster in the way many (if not all) companies
handle such claims. I have heard many stories about worker's comp claims lasting
and dragging on and on, only resulting in delaying real proper help and/or medical
attention to the employees who may be in dire need. The minimum wage in our
country has always been too low for me. I can see this being a minimum wage
amount issues to a teenager but as an adult the 7.25 hourly wage is not enough.
In today's market everything is so inflated. The cost of living is increasing daily,
so it is very important that the minimum wage is raised. With the amount of
minimum wage almost doubling this will help a lot of people. I like how you put
it by saying close the income gap.
Recently in my area Target raised their minimum wage to $18 an hour. I almost
started to apply at target, but I am not a big on sales or retail. I think that this
was a big step for Target, and it also sets a standard for other employers. When
someone is applying for a job and the competition is Walmart at $9 and Target at
$18 the choice is easy. This also shows that target cares about their employees and
they feel like they deserve more than the bare minimum. Hopefully, the minimum
wage law will go in effect across the nation. The cost of living is increasing
everywhere, Gas prices are high, the cost of food has increased, and bills have also
gone up. It is important that minimum wage goes up and that not only minimum
wage, but also companies are held accountable in increasing their workers' pay.
