Posts

Seventh Circuit: ADA Reasonable Accommodation and Discrimination Claims Tempered by Employee Behavior

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

July 23, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Graham v. Artic Zone Iceplex, LLC, a former employee claimed a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by the employer for (1) failure to provide reasonable accommodations of his disability, and (2) terminating him due to his disability. The Court explained that identifying a “reasonable accommodation” for an employee requires input from both employee and employer, and is a collaborative effort. This includes notice by the disabled employee to the employer if an accommodation provided does not meet the employee’s needs. If the employee fails to provide sufficient information in this regard, the employer cannot be held liable for failing to accommodate the employee.

Read more

September Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. REMINDER! EEO-1 Component 2 Reporting is Due September 30th
  2. DOL Says DOT Drivers Sleeping in Berths While Off-Duty is Unpaid Time
  3. 2nd Circuit: Collectively Bargained Arbitration is Governed by the Scope of the Agreement
  4. 9th Circuit: The Dynamex Independent Contractor Test Does Not Apply Retroactively – For Now
  5. New Noncompete Restrictions in Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island
  6. Arizona: Mini-COBRA and Bona Fide Associations Updates
  7. California: Hairstyles Soon to Be Protected From Discrimination
  8. Emeryville, CA: Small Independent Restaurant Minimum Wage Hold Repealed
  9. Florida: Unemployment Compensation Protections for Domestic Violence Victims
  10. Indiana: Direct Sellers are Exempt from Minimum Wage Rules
  11. Iowa: Enacts Negligent Hiring Protections for Employers
  12. Louisiana: Electronic Notice to Employees Permitted for Group Health Insurance Plans
  13. Kansas City, MO: Enacts Salary History Inquiry Ban
  14. New Hampshire: Child Labor Hours Restricted
  15. New York: Paid Family Leave Benefit Schedule Update
  16. New York: Whistleblower’s Immigration Status is Protected
  17. Ohio: Motor Carrier Drivers Excluded from Definition of “Employee”
  18. Pittsburgh, PA: Paid Sick Leave is Revived by State Supreme Court
  19. Vermont: Expunged Records Make Criminal Convictions Vanish
  20. Virginia: Updates to Minimum Wage Exemptions and Nondisclosure Agreements
  21. West Virginia: Effect of Expunged Criminal Convictions

Read more

Seventh Circuit: Obesity is a Disability Under the ADA Under Limited Circumstances

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

June 12, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Richardson v. Chicago Transit Authority, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal stated that obesity would only be considered a disability under the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) if the obesity is caused by a physiological disorder or condition.  This decision aligns the Seventh Circuit with the Second, Sixth, and Eighth Circuit courts.

Generally, employers covered by the ADA are required to provide disabled employees with reasonable accommodations that will allow the disabled person to perform the essential function of their job.  Richardson provides employers with guidance on how the ADA applies to obesity.  If an obese individual’s condition prevents them from performing essential job duties, or threatens the safety of others, employers may still need to engage in the interactive process to determine if the individual’s condition qualifies under the ADA or other state or local laws.

Action Items

  1. Review interactive process procedures for consistency with this ruling.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2019 ManagEase

Indiana: Employers Now Permitted to Deduct Uniform Rental from Wages

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IN Employees

EFFECTIVE

May 1, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

SB 99 now permits employers to deduct the cost of uniform rentals from an employee’s paycheck, including the cost of things like uniform shirts, pants, or job-related clothing. Previously, paycheck deductions were only permitted under specific circumstances, and could only be made for approved reasons listed in Indiana’s wage deduction statute (primarily, health insurance premiums and union dues).  Uniform and job-required equipment “purchases” were added to the statute in 2015; with SB 99, rental of uniform wear is now added to this list of approved deductions.

Read more

May Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. California: Registered Fictitious Business Names May Be Listed on Pay Stubs
  2. Indiana: Leaving Work to Voluntarily Testify is Not Protected
  3. Kentucky: Attorneys Must Represent Employers at Unemployment Proceedings
  4. New York, NY: Bans Pre-Employment Marijuana Testing in 2020
  5. New York, NY: Prohibits Discrimination Based on Employee Sexual and Reproductive Health Decisions
  6. Westchester County, NY: Updated Guidance Issued on Paid Sick Leave

Read more

Indiana: State Supreme Court Sheds Light on Independent Contractor Test for On-Demand Services

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IN Employees

EFFECTIVE

January 23, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Q.D.-A, Inc. v. Indiana Department of Workforce Development, the Indiana Supreme Court examined whether or not a large vehicle transportation driver qualified as an independent contractor.  Q.D.-A is a transportation matching service that coordinates independent drivers with manufacturers in order to transport large recreational or non-towable vehicles. Q.D.-A required the driver to attend a two-day training orientation on federal regulations and complete a driving test, but the driver was otherwise able to refuse jobs, work with other competitors, and negotiate his own pay.

Read more

Seventh Circuit: ADEA Disparate Impact Protections Do Not Apply to Job Applicants

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

January 23, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Kleber v. CareFusion Corporation, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal stated that the disparate impact protections under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) do not apply to job applicants who are not current employees. Specifically, Section 4(a)(2) of the ADEA specifically states that it applies to “employees.” There, a job posting indicated a position available for an individual with “3 to 7 years (no more than 7 years)” of experience. A 58-year old applicant did not get an interview, and sued for disparate impact under the ADEA because the stated experience requirement necessarily excluded him due to his age.

Read more

Seventh Circuit: Fair Credit Reporting Act Pre-Adverse Action Requirements Are Actionable

APPLIES TO

Employers with IL, IN, WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

August 29, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Contrary to the Ninth Circuit’s recently ruling, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeal stated that an employer’s failure to provide a copy of an applicant’s background check report and notice of rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) gives an applicant standing to sue the employer, because it amounts to an allegation of being deprived a chance to benefit. Employers are required to provide the report and notice to applicants under the FCRA so that they may have the opportunity to contest the accuracy or completeness of the information.

Seventh Circuit: ADEA Applies to Employees and Job Applicants

APPLIES TO

All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees

EFFECTIVE

April 26, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In a split from an Eleventh Circuit ruling last year, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently stated that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) provides protections not only to current employees aged 40 or older, but to similarly situated job applicants as well.