The current case of Butler v. FedEx Corp., involves an employee, Lynette Butler who worked for FedEx Trade Networks Transportation & Brokerage Inc. for 17 years until she was fired on November 2012. In 2010 Butler was assigned the position of transportation supervisor, where she approved driver timecards and monitored costs. In the course and …
Recently the 2nd District Court of Appeals ruled against Lexmark International, Inc., that its vacation policy violated California Labor Code Section 227.3 which states in pertinent part that an employer’s vacation policy “shall not provide for forfeiture of vested vacation time” and awarded plaintiffs $13 million. Under California law and as affirmed by the court, …
In Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno (2011) 51 Cal.4th 659 (Sonic I), a California Court of Appeals ruled that it is contrary to public policy and unconscionable for an employer to require an employee, as a condition of employment, to waive the right to a Berman hearing, a dispute resolution forum established by the Legislature …
WASHINGTON (Sept 2013) — a federal judge in California ruled last week that clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch Co. discriminated against a Muslim employee on religious grounds, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Monday. The lawsuit was filed by the EEOC in 2011 on behalf of Umme-Hani Khan, a Muslim who was fired in February 2010 …
CA UPDATE: A Dress Code Can Result In Major Legal Claims Read More »
Harvard University – Due to a recent student cheating scandal that rocked the Harvard School of Government, as part of an investigation into the matter school administrators decided to audit the email accounts of Assistant Deans within the department. Assistant Deans are university employees who live in the dorms with students. These individuals are provided …
Employer Email Policies – Be clear and consistent Read More »
The United States Supreme Court has issued a landmark ruling in the case of United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307 (June 26, 2013), and an additional important decision in the matter of Hollingsworth, et al. v. Perry, No. 12-144 (June 26, 2013). THE DECISIONS In Windsor, the United States Supreme Court ruled the Defense of Marriage Act …
CA Urgent: New U.S. Supreme Court Rulings Impact on Employer Policies Read More »
SPECIAL 2013 LEGAL UPDATE ALERT As part of Holman HR’s continuing efforts to keep you, our client apprised of new legislation, below is a comprehensive list and summary of all new employment laws for 2013 affecting California employers. For our clients who do not operate facilities within California we will also update you as to …
An employer paid half a million dollars to settle a recent case where a motorcyclist was killed after colliding with an employee who was driving while looking for his cell phone after dropping it. Even though the accident occurred after normal work hours, the employer was liable because the employee was talking to a client …
“Danger Dialing” – Implement a Distracted Driving Policy? Read More »
In Rent-A-Center v. Jackson, the United States Supreme Court held that arbitration agreements are contracts, and, like other contracts, should be enforced according to their terms which terms may include a provision allowing an arbitrator to determine that arbitration is appropriate.
