Practical HR Tips, News & Advice. Updated Daily.
A new ruling from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court should be a warning to employers in the state that refuse to tolerate medical marijuana use by employees with a disability.
In a recent decision, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey ruled that an employee who claimed he was terminated for discriminatory reasons based on his disability was laid off for legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons in a reduction in force (RIF).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit—which covers Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania—recently upheld an employer’s trial court victory, providing useful guidance for employers seeking to manage difficult employees in the midst of workers’ compensation claims.
Recently we began to explore ways to keep older workers engaged so they are more likely to stay at your company. Today we’ll explore a few more tips for keeping them engaged, including reduced schedules, additional training, and reducing age discrimination.
The logic of engagement is simple for HR managers and recruiters: If you keep employees engaged, you don’t have to fill as many vacancies. Engagement isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution for the various generations in your workforce. Today we’ll focus on how to keep your older workers from wandering off due to lack of engagement.
by Rosalind H. Cooper A recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Stewart v Elk Valley Coal Corp., 2017 SCC 30, has confirmed that employers have the ability to take disciplinary action against employees for drug and alcohol use in safety-sensitive workplaces. The worker in this case was employed in a mine where […]
Have you heard the term “sex stereotyping”? Do you know what it means in reference to workplace behaviors?
We at the HR Daily Advisor are here at SHRM’s 2017 Annual Conference and Exposition in New Orleans. Yesterday I attended a session by Glenn Llopis, a best-selling author, columnist, and senior advisor to Fortune 500, entitled Leading Hispanic Employees (for Non-Hispanic Supervisors).
A brewery employee suffering from a medical condition was placed on additional work restrictions by his new treating physician. Accommodating the new restrictions put the employer in a position where it had to either invest in expensive equipment or let the employee walk.
What if an employee complains about harassment, but you investigate and find no evidence of harassment? Or, what if an employee files a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging discrimination, but the EEOC also does not find any wrongdoing? Can you fire either of these employees for making false claims?