Don't Text and Drive!

The press has widely reported the perils of using a cell phone while driving. Certainly, every company whose employees travel by car in the scope of their employment should have a policy that prohibits the use of a cell phone while driving. There have been recent cases where employers have been held liable for injuries suffered by persons involved in accidents caused by the employee's cell phone use.

Some states prohibit cell phone use while driving unless a driver is using a hands free device. Unfortunately, Georgia has yet to regulate cell phone use. Studies have shown that it is a distraction and can cut down on reaction times while driving. Since employers have a duty to keep their employees safe, they should implement policies to prevent needless cell phone related accidents.

Of course, cell phone use goes beyond being on the phone. With the increase use of smart phones, persons are just as likely to be text messaging as they are to be on the phone with someone. Text messaging while driving can be more dangerous than talking on a cell phone because it usually requires both hands to type, as well as looking down at the smart phone (and not at the road). In response to "texting while driving", several states have completely banned the practice by drivers. These states are: Alaska, California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Jersey and Washington. Unlike many seat belt laws, most of the states that have banned text messaging while driving make it a primary offense, meaning law enforcement can stop a driver for the offense (as opposed to secondary, where the police can pull a driver over for something like a broken tail light and then can add an offense such as texting or not wearing a seat belt).

So, companies should amend their policies and procedures to address "texting while driving", particularly where state law addresses the subject.

Do you give notice when you layoff employees?

The obligation to give notice of a layoff depends upon whether the company is engaging in a mass or group layoff or a single layoff situation. If the WARN Act applies to the layoff in a group layoff situation (or more typically, where a plant or location completely closes down), that can require a 60-day notification to all effected employees.

State law may address this issue as well, but this typically falls into a question of an employer's comfort level with the employees and how they will react to the layoff. Assuming that it is one person effected by the layoff, would giving advance notice to that person result in possible sabotage? Would it cause the person to lack productivity until his/her last day of work? Does it create a security risk because that person has access to sensitive information?

In some case, an employer might consider some giving as a courtesy to the employee to allow him/her a jump on finding other employment (which could also cut down on the length of an unemployment claim).

Finally, an employer can offer a severance package which would typically be under the condition that the employee have at least 21 days to consider the offer (assuming it would be in compliance with the ADEA and the OWPBA). The last date of employment can be a future date or be in the past. In this sense, a severance package can be used to provide advance notice of a layoff.

Employee Time Off Does Cost You

We all know that the cost of training new hires and recruiting new employees is more than just paying new salaries and recruiting fees. However, did you know that your basic employee absence carries a significant cost?

According to a new study by Mercer, the cost of an employee absence averages about 36 percent of base payroll. Mercer surveyed over 450 organizations. It found that direct costs (such as pay provided to an employee for time not worked) and indirect costs (such as replacement labor costs and lost time) of employee absence run almost 36% of base payroll, the majority of which(26.6 percent) are attributed to “planned” absences like vacations. However, “unplanned incidental” absences (like sick days) amount to 6% of payroll.

The study suggests that employer can reduce these costs by having sound benefits and attendance policies; effect absence management and administration; and identifying the underlying causes of employee absence.

Should You Get Credit for Pregnancy Leave?

Does the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) require employers to credit pregnancy-related time off in calculating pension benefits if the time off occurred before the law was enacted?

The Supreme Court will take up this issue in AT&T Corp. v. Hulteen. The plaintiffs were granted time off from pregnancy prior to the enactment of the PDA. Years later, the plaintiffs are now seeking to get the time off taken for pregnancy credited as service time for purposes of calculating their pensions. Essentially, the plaintiffs are asking for the law to retroactively apply because if it does not, they are being discriminated against because of pregnancy.

The plaintiffs may benefit from the 1986 decision in Bazemore v. Friday, which allowed black workers to challenge a pay scale that went into effect before Title VII was enacted.

On the other hand, the Court's 2007 decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber holds that "The fact that pre-charging period discrimination adversely affects the calculation of a neutral factor like seniority … that is used in determining future pay does not mean that each new paycheck constitutes a new violation and restarts the EEOC charging period", which would mean that the claims may fail.

Either way, it is an interesting case.

Take Proper Care with Layoffs

With the economy spiraling downwards, many companies have chosen to layoff staff in an effort to reduce costs or to streamline operations. Layoffs raise a number of legal issues that make it imprudent to simply let an employee go without forethought.

1. If you plan on offering an employee severance, you must consider that if the offer differs between similarly situated employees (either offered in the past or at the same time), you may run afoul of the federal employment discrimination laws. You must be mindful of laying off persons in protected classes, such as race, religion, disability, national origin, or sex. If you offer a lesser severance to an employee in a protected class, you may be facing an EEOC discrimination charge.

2. Severance agreements must comply with certain laws and contain certain disclosures in order to be legally enforceable. This is particularly true when you are offering severance to an employee over the age of 40. The Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act which is contained within the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, contains certain requirements that mandate an employee be able to make a "knowing and voluntary waiver" if the severance is in exchange for giving up any claims against the company that the employee might have.

3. If you are closing an entire facility or laying off a group of employees, you may be required to give 60 days notice prior to the layoffs under WARN Act.

4. If you have laid off employees based on "least best" performers, you should have solid documentation to support the reasons why the employee was a low performer. If you have not maintained documentation on performance, you will have difficulty in challenging an unemployment claim or in justifying why you laid a certain employee off over another (which again, may get into a discrimination claim).

Too Many Americans Feel Workplace Discrimination

According to a recent FindLaw survey, more than one in four Americans has been discriminated against at their place of employment.

If that figure is accurate, it's way too high. I used to represent individuals in employment law matters. I made the transition over to the management side many years ago due to a variety of reasons, including:

• Amendments to the Civil Rights laws resulted in few plaintiff's cases successfully surviving summary judgment;
• Because of defense success on summary judgment, settlement value (and offers to settle) were reduced or reserved until after the ruling on the motion for summary judgment;
• Most of the cases I saw arose out of some one's "bad day at work", which was a symptom of a larger problem: employers did a poor job of bridging the communication gap between rank-and-file employees and management. Most employees were unhappy because they had no outlet to aggrieve concerns, so instead of complaining to management, they were seeking out attorneys.

I realized that what I was doing had limited societal utility; I was "leveraging" cases to the point of settlement, but the problem was not being solved with the communication gap in the workplace. So, I started transitioning to the management side with an emphasis on preventing workplace disputes before they arose. Put another way, if I can educate clients on how to properly run a workplace, on what employees' rights and responsibilities are, then I've preventing a "bad day at work" and in the process helped with the great good.

So, given my goals and practice focus, it disturbs me that so many people still feel victimized at their workplace. It shows that we still have a long way to go with training and educating employers on best practices in the workplace.

Is Your Company Wage & Hour Compliant?

In case you thought that wages and hour cases were rare, think again. Through April 2008, almost 1,900 wage and hour cases had been filed in federal district courts. If this trend continues, the number of wage and hour cases will exceed 2007 levels. Plus, these figures do not include state court filings.

• How do you avoid wage and hour claims? Best practices to avoid such claims include:
• Auditing all positions classified as exempt from overtime.
• If you have not conducted an audit in the past few years, it's time for a follow-up review of lower level managers and supervisors should to ensure there have been no changes in duties.
• Making sure your company has adopted and published a "safe harbor" policy on deductions from salaried employees.
• Reviewing timekeeping policies to avoid or reduce the possibility of an employee claiming to have been working, eliminating such things as "standard" or "automatic" deductions for lunch, rounding hours, and similar practices.
• Reviewing policies and procedures to review deductions from wages and salaries to ensure that they comply with the minimum wage and overtime requirements of state and federal law.