Friday Thoughts on Employment Law
Immigration. As I was driving to work yesterday, I passed a Taxi, stopped in the middle of the road, with flashers flashing, waiting to pick someone up to take them to work (I reached this conclusion by the way the person was dressed and the fact that the Taxi is there on a regular basis at the same time. However, this was the first time I saw it in the middle of the road). My first thought was that this would be in violation of Alabama's new Immigration Act, once it is effective, since the Taxi was impeding the normal flow of traffic while picking up a person for work at another location. This conduct would subject both the driver and the passenger to criminal charges and possibly the forfeiture of the Taxi. Is this what the law is supposed to cover?
Social Media. An interesting piece in the Birmingham News this morning by Kevin Scarbinsky pointing out that the NCAA charged North Carolina with an NCAA violation by not properly monitoring several football players "social networking activity that visibly illustrated potential amateurism violations within the football program..." Is this a sign of things to come in the workplace, if employers engage in improper conduct, use social networking sites to discuss it, and the company did not know about it?
Class actions. The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wal-Mart, denying to certify a class action lawsuit with as many as 1.6 million women as members of the class alleging sexual discrimination. In a 5-4 decision, with Justice Scalia writing the majority opinion, the Court found that there were too many managerial decisions being made to certify the claims as a class action.
Sexual Harassment Settlement. Recently, the EEOC announced a $1.95 million settlement with U.S. Security Associates to resolve a sexual harassment lawsuit brought by the EEOC. The EEOC alleged, in the lawsuit, that Mr. Hargrove, the district manager for USSA in Birmingham, sexually harassed several female employees by subjecting them to unwelcome sexual demands, demeaning gestures, inappropriate touching, and other offensive conduct. One of these employees, Jamie Marks, had previously filed her own suit against USSA and received a $2.7 million jury verdict. 6 other females intervened in the EEOC's case. As part of the settlement, USSA agreed to pay $1.95 million to the women. USSA also entered into a Consent Decree, for a period of 42 months, and agreed to revise it's policies and procedures and train all staff on anti-harassment procedures. USSA also agreed to hire a consent decree coordinator who will be responsible for monitoring USSA's compliance and submitting periodic reports to the EEOC.
Make sure you’ve read our disclaimer prior to commenting.