By William W. Bowser
In my practice, drug and alcohol issues came to the forefront in the 90’s. There was a lot of publicity then about transit workers and big rig drivers causing accidents when they were high.
The Department of Transportation (“DOT”) responded by adopting regulations requiring CDL drivers to be tested for drugs under various scenarios. These scenarios included pre-employment, post-accident, and at random. Every employer with at least one CDL driver had to adopt a pretty comprehensive drug and alcohol policy. I drafted a lot of them.
Once the CDL drivers were covered, employers started expanding the scope of these policies to cover other employees. The stated purpose was to have an efficient and productive workplace and to protect the public. Continue reading
By Lauren E.M. Russell
The more technological of our readers may be aware of a brouhaha involving a website named Reddit. Reddit is best known, among the general population, for conducting structured question-and-answer sessions called Ask Me Anything (AMA), in which subjects respond to questions posted by Reddit users. The subjects of an AMA may range from the mundane (a trash man) to extremely high profile politicians, including President Obama. One Reddit employee, Victoria Taylor, was largely responsible for organizing and facilitating AMAs. She was fired in early July, and the resulting firestorm offers many lessons in what not to do when terminating a high profile employee. Continue reading
I never discuss politics. Never. I don’t have the stomach for it, to be honest, and I avoid the subject like the plague. That said, I did manage to watch part of the Presidential Debate on Tuesday night. There are ample pundits who surely have more insightful (i.e., political) commentary than what I can offer. So I’ll gladly leave the politics to others and stick with what I know–employment law. Here’s one HR-related lesson that I took away from the debate. Continue reading
Jason Selch worked as an investment analyst for his employer for 10 years. The company went through multiple mergers and acquisitions and eventually was bought by a Bank of America subsidiary. After the BoA merger, Selch learned that his friend and co-worker had been terminated after declining to accept a pay cut. Continue reading
When terminating an employee, employers need only one reason. Of course, there is rarely just a single reason for reaching the decision. But the existence of multiple reasons does not mandate that each reason be shared with the employee. In other words, when an employer makes the decision to terminate, there should be only one reason upon which the employer relies and which is shared with the employee-the “final straw.” When an employer changes its “final straw,” it raises doubts both with the employee and with the court and changing reasons are evidence of unlawful discrimination. Continue reading
It happens everyday. Employees are let go for poor performance or lack of work. After the decision to terminate has been made, employers must consider whether to offer the employee additional pay or benefits in exchange for a release by the employee of all claims he or she may have against the employer.
A separation and release agreement is simply the contract used to document the understandings reached by the parties. In addition to the severance payment and release, the employer might agree to provide a neutral reference or outplacement services for the employee. The agreement might also contain an agreement by the employee avoid working for a competitor for a period of time.
When should an employer consider a separation and release agreement? The following situations are typical:
· A termination in which the employee has already asserted a claim against the employer;
· A termination in which the employer is concerned that the employer will likely assert a claim;
· A termination in which the employer is willing to provide extra pay or benefits above what the employer would normally be entitled in exchange for a waiver of claims.
Although a waiver of claims is very desirable, employers should consider the possible consequences of asking for such a waiver, particularly if the severance payment is going to be small. By asking for the waiver, the employer may suggest to the employee – for the first time — that he or she actually has a claim.
Our annual employment law seminar, held last month, was a tremendous success. As promised, we posted the first of the presentation slides (COBRA and the Economic Stimulus Package), last week. Today, we are happy to deliver the slides from Scott Holt and Maribeth Minella’s “Layoffs and Reduction in Force” presentation.
Mark your calendars–our next seminar will be held on June 5, 2009, as part of our Breakfast Briefing series. Look for more information this week on the topic and registration. In the meantime, don’t hesitate to let us know if there are topics in particular that are on your radar these days.
For more information on terminations and layoffs, please see our prior posts, Top Ten Layoff Tips, and Bad Reason #29 to Fire an Employee.