As much as we all love a good party, they create increased risks of liability for employers. There are some simple ways for employers to minimize their risks. Without question, planning ahead and limiting alcohol consumption are two key ways to celebrate the season—without getting sued. As you might expect, the most common liability issues arise from serving alcohol at the office party. Can our company be held responsible for automobile accidents caused by intoxicated employees on their way home? Can our company be held liable for inappropriate behavior, including claims of sexual harassment, even when the party is held after work hours? Unfortunately, the correct answers to these questions depend on a number of factors. The liability determination is often fact intensive and may differ from situation to situation. Ensslin also reports that the laws on these issues vary widely by state.
Be My Valentine! – BUT First Please Review and Sign Below
Every company needs to consider a policy on workplace dating. Without a clear policy, an office relationship can lead to charges of sexual harassment and legal consequences for the employer. Although some companies chose to have no policy on dating, that leaves them open to potential liability if a supervisor is shown to have sexually harassed a subordinate, for example, by giving a poor performance review to a former partner.
To avoid this, companies institute various types of dating policy. No-Dating Policies No-dating policies generally ban dating between a supervisor and their subordinate. Employment attorney Anna Cohen, writing in HR Hero Online, suggests that no-dating policies can be problematic, as it is difficult to define exactly the type of behavior that will be restricted.
Company Culture Inter-Office Dating What Your Company Should Know Romance in the workplace can land your company in hot waters, especially in the absence of thoughtful HR policies. Getty Images If you own a company, chances are you’ve had to decide and at times reassess whether to allow consensual dating and romantic relationships among your employees — or, in legalese, whether and to what extent to adopt an office “non-fraternization” policy.
Although there are no laws which outright prohibit interoffice relationships, as shown in the news of late, they carry obvious risks , such as: On the other hand, many view workplace relationships as an inevitable byproduct of today’s interconnected world. This trend may continue to gain steam. For example, polling suggests millennials are much more open to office romance than their older counterparts. Given these competing concerns, how can you craft employment policies which protect both your employees and your business?
The Law and Workplace Dating Again, there are no laws which prohibit employee dating per se. Of course, as with any personnel policy or practice, decisions around employee dating will be subject to general anti-discrimination scrutiny. This means employers can face discrimination liability if, for example, it is shown they permitted dating among employees who are under 40 but not among employees over 40, among straight employees but not gay employees and the like.
Legal Information: Indiana
Written by Travis Bjorklund on February 13, No matter the size of the organization, effective managers must be strong communicators to inspire and lead their teams. Unfortunately, with day-to-day business demands, communication skills are getting short shrift at too many companies. Your office environment, corporate culture, and treatment of customers and employees all say a lot about your company.
Each of these contributes to your overall reputation in the marketplace or, if you prefer, your brand. Encourage regular and ongoing feedback from managers and supervisors to employees.
Don’t Get Fired Or Quit, Get Laid Off Instead. Many companies have a non-interoffice dating policy. * Do not come in late or leave early more than once a week. Companies can terminate you for being incessantly late, so don’t slack too much. That said, check your state laws before jumping ship.
If, after reading this article, you would like more information, we invite you to contact us at Shouse Law Group. Generally speaking, a protective order is a court order that is designed to protect a person from harassment, stalking, or threats by the person named in the order. The exact order will dictate exactly what type of behavior is or is not prohibited but will likely include provisions that the restrained party refrain from any type of contact with the protected individual.
Types of Restraining Orders There are essentially four types of California protective orders that the courts will issue: These types of orders are most frequently requested by the police when they respond to a domestic violence call. The officer informs the offender, if present, about the order which takes effect immediately.
An EPO is good for up to seven 7 days. Beyond that, you will need to go to the court to request a temporary or permanent order. You ask the court to issue a TRO when a your emergency protective order expires, or b you are the victim of harassment. For purposes of California protective orders, “harassment” refers to unlawful violence or a credible threat of unlawful violence , behavior that seriously alarms or annoys another person that serves no legitimate purpose, and behavior that would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress and that actually does causes emotional distress to the victim.
The judge will hear from both the applicant and the person who would be restrained by the order in order to determine a whether to issue the order, b the types of restrictions to include in the order, and c the length of the order. But having one is strongly advised. The paperwork and deadlines that are involved in securing a protective order may be overwhelming and complex.
BACTES Imaging Solutions Employee Reviews
Additionally, I know we share an awareness of the importance of precedent in our decision-making processes and our handling of workplace safety issues in a prudent, responsible, and legally compliant manner. It is my observation that Company does in fact have a workplace-bullying problem. While workplace bullying is completely legal in the United States, it has been cited by the FBI as a precursor to and risk factor for workplace violence; for more information please see: Unless you have an objection, I will draft a sample policy for your review.
As you know, employees do have right to organize under the NLRA. Unless I am unaware of additional information or documentation related to this matter, I recommend that we revisit this situation and seek technical assistance to ensure that we at Company have not made any errors in violation of the NLRA.
INTEROFFICE DATING: Introduction: Tom, a supervisor, and Penny, his subordinate, decide to go out on a date after they completed a project together. Discussion: A relationship involving two employees of the same organization (“inter-office dating“) is not necessarily sexual harassment. Remember, sexual harassment involves unwanted, sexual behavior.
Sure, but they aren’t necessarily good. Ninety-three percent of workers lie “regularly and habitually” in the workplace, according to a survey by psychotherapist Brad Blanton — and that’s more often than we would at home. So what are the lies we tell , and why do we tell them? We found a number that are not only common, but have been told so often that the truth can seem odder by comparison.
If you’re over 50, you know. In a SimplyHired survey on workplace lying, it was noted that laws protecting workers against age discrimination didn’t change the fact that long-term unemployment is higher among Americans over 50 — who fear replacement by younger, less expensive workers. Not only are older workers more likely to lie about having to see a doctor, but parents 37 percent lie about appointments more than non-parents 31 percent. Again, despite such discrimination being illegal, an increasing number of workplace parents are suing employers for discriminating against them.
Other employees, meanwhile, may say that they have a doctors’ appointment to miss part or all of a work day. Even 28 percent of workers at companies with paid time off lie to get a sick day , and those lies have consequences: That’s up a whopping 25 points from a similar OfficeTeam survey in There are consequences to the lies, though:
Adjustment of Status
By Alison Doyle Updated November 10, What is workplace discrimination, and what constitutes discrimination against employees or job applicants? It is illegal to discriminate in any facet of employment, so workplace discrimination extends beyond hiring and firing to discrimination that can happen to someone who is currently employed. What is Employment Discrimination? It is illegal to discriminate based on race, religion, gender, or national original when hiring or in the workplace.
Federal contractors and subcontractors must take affirmative action to guarantee equal employment opportunity without regard to these factors. In addition, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of makes it unlawful to discriminate in hiring, discharge, promotion, referral, and other facets of employment, on the basis of color, race, religion, sex, or national origin.
Love, relationships, romance, and dating. In recently giving the go-ahead to an employee who was forced to witness a love affair between two colleagues, the Massachusetts Appeals Court has given you another reason to crack down on interoffice affairs.
Although still considered taboo by many employers in Colorado, interoffice dating is becoming a far more common scenario. For instance, 85 percent of 18 to year-olds surveyed admitted they would have no problem dating a co-worker as compared to just 35 percent of 30 to year-olds claiming the same. Additionally, some industries are more forgiving of office romances due to the longer hours worked.
Since it can be difficult to have a social life in this case, many co-workers find it only natural to develop relationships with one another. While interoffice dating is not exactly illegal, it can lead to potential liability issues. This is particularly true when relationships develop between subordinates and supervisors. In this case, allegations of sexual harassment or impropriety could arise in the event that the relationship ends on an unhappy note.
One easy thing Facebook should do in Myanmar
Whether or not there are policies forbidding them, office relationships happen. Dana Brownlee, president of professional training development company Professionalism Matters , advises against initiating a romance with your manager, or, likewise, with anyone who reports to you directly or indirectly. Perhaps that makes sense given the amount of time we spend at work: In an office relationship, you can relate to the struggles someone faces from 9 to 5, says Brownlee.
Does your company strictly prohibit relationships of any kind?
After firing CEO Dov Charney last month, American Apparel decided to update its company code of ethics with stricter guidelines regarding interoffice relationships. According to the new policy.
Authority[ edit ] Legal writing places heavy reliance on authority. In most legal writing, the writer must back up assertions and statements with citations to authority. This is accomplished by a unique and complicated citation system, unlike that used in any other genre of writing. The standard methods for American legal citation are defined by two competing rule books: A Uniform System of Citation.
Different methods may be used in other countries. Precedent means the way things have been done before. For example, a lawyer who must prepare a contract and who has prepared a similar contract before will often re-use, with limited changes, the old contract for the new occasion. Or a lawyer who has filed a successful motion to dismiss a lawsuit may use the same or a very similar form of motion again in another case, and so on. Many lawyers use and re-use written documents in this way and call these re-usable documents templates or, less commonly, forms.
Legal writing extensively uses technical terminology that can be categorised in four ways: Specialized words and phrases unique to law, e.
901 Prior Art [R-08.2012]
September 21, In every job interview, the goal is to obtain important information while building a friendly rapport with the candidate. But some questions are just a little too friendly. Protect yourself and your company from legal trouble and embarrassment by avoiding the wrong questions while still getting to the root of the concern behind the question.
Read on for 30 ways to turn litigious questions into insightful, legal alternatives.
Compliance with Non-Discrimination Laws and Regulations; Interoffice Mail. Interoffice mail consists of loose and enveloped correspondence between students, staff, faculty, and administrators. To ensure proper delivery, please follow these guidelines: United Parcel Service.
Tom, a supervisor, and Penny, his subordinate, decide to go out on a date after they completed a project together. A relationship involving two employees of the same organization “inter-office dating” is not necessarily sexual harassment. Remember, sexual harassment involves unwanted, sexual behavior. If the relationship is voluntary on both sides, neither member of the couple is being harassed. However, because such relationships may lead to problems that could affect employees’ job performance, many organizations do have rules about inter-office dating.
Some organizations don’t tolerate inter-office relationships, while some try to discourage them.
Workplace Dating & Affairs
Mail arrival on campus: United Parcel Service outgoing: Outbound mail delivery to post office:
Employee Relations at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) provides guidance and information to Federal government agencies on the statutes, case law, and regulations for taking conduct and performance based actions.
The report, which came amid growing concerns about the way that social networks can incite violence, contained some of the most grave charges leveled against Facebook to date. After the dust from the midterms more or less cleared, I read the report. The authors report speaking with about 60 people in Myanmar for their report, but they fail to explore any specific instances of hate speech on the platform or the resulting harms. Their analysis is limited to high-level, who-can-really-say equivocating.
Its approach to understanding the situation on the ground in Myanmar appears to be primarily anecdotal, and its conclusions are the same as anyone who read a news wire story about the issue this spring. I began reading the report in the hopes that it would clarify the connection between hate speech posted on social media and real-world violence. We are starving for knowledge about how unique platform mechanics such as share buttons and encryption contribute to lynch mobs.
But instead, the authors choose to explore the current political dynamics in Myanmar at great length, and ultimately offer Facebook a to-do list of tasks that will let the company continue operating with minimal disruption to its business. The nonprofit did not respond to a request for comment Friday afternoon. Fortunately, though, this week we got a second report on Facebook and Myanmar — and this one, I thought, was much more useful.
Unlike BSR, the UN report asks why Facebook would enter Myanmar — or any other country rife with conflict — without first understanding how it would moderate content on the platform. Before entering any new market, particularly those with volatile ethnic, religious or other social tensions, Facebook and other social media platforms, including messenger systems, should conduct in-depth human rights impact assessments for their products, policies and operations, based on the national context and take mitigating measures to reduce risks as much as possible.
Instead, Facebook launched a country-specific version of Myanmar in , and added it to its since-discontinued Free Basics program a year later. Soon, the company had 20 million users in the country — despite the fact that, due to peculiarities of the local language and Unicode, its non-Burmese speaking moderators had very little insight into what was happening on the platform.