Pay Discrimination Case on Supreme Court Docket

So far only one of the cases on the U.S. Supreme Court 2006-2007 docket directly involves an employment issue, but it is an important question concerning limits on how far a court can look into the past to find discriminatory pay decisions.

Light Duty Issues – Pregnancy, ADA

In the area of light duty assignments for temporarily “disabled” employees two questions that often arise are how to treat pregnant employees who are not able to perform all their regular job duties and how do the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) interact with light duty?

Although employers are under no legal obligation to create a new position for a disabled worker, many employers use temporary light duty assignments to help an employee injured on the job ease back into working.  Because most companies don’t have a large number of light duty assignments, employers often restrict their usage to recovery from employment-related injuries.  This would obviously rule out light duty positions for pregnant employees.  Can employers do this or is it considered pregnancy or sex discrimination?

FMLA Rulings

When employees miss work because of a serious health condition and use leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act, the question arises as to how an employer can verify that the employee was in fact seriously ill and entitled to the leave.  Two recent court cases provide some guidance to employers on that issue, mainly as to what they can’t do.

Under the regulations accompanying the FMLA, when an employee requests leave for a serious health condition, the employer may request certification from the employee’s health care provider.  That certification is sufficient if it provides the date the health condition began, its probable duration, relevant medical facts, and a statement that the employee is unable to work.  If the employer finds the certification incomplete it must offer the employee an opportunity to cure the deficiency.

In a case involving a Federal Express employee, the worker was fired after missing three days of work because of bronchitis.  Fed Ex terminated him because his doctor did not provide the specific information requested; only stating that he had bronchitis and the date it began.  This made the absence unexcused and put the employee below the company attendance standard.

Payroll Changes for 2007

Union Local Breaks with AFL-CIO over Immigrant Amnesty

While the AFL-CIO leadership remains committed to immigration reform, including amnesty for illegal aliens, some...

Approaching Deadlines for Human Resource/Payroll Professionals

Latest Department of Labor Numbers