<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
    xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
    
    <channel>
    
    <title>Employment Law Forums</title>
    <link>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/</link>
    <description>Employment Law Forums</description>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    <dc:rights>Copyright 2008</dc:rights>
    <dc:date>2008-04-21T14:13:21-05:00</dc:date>
    <admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://expressionengine.com/" />
    

    <item>
      <title>1983 actions</title>
      <link>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/40/</link>
      <guid>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/40/#When:14:13:21Z</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;does anyone have a suggestion for a good treaties or other reading material to bring a 1983 action against a county government for failing to adhere to their merit system of employment rules in terminating an employee?&amp;nbsp; Or is anyone familair with this type of litigation?
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2008-04-21T14:13:21-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Blogging 102&#8230;Plaintiffs Using the Internet to Leverage Their Claims</title>
      <link>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/38/</link>
      <guid>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/38/#When:14:07:21Z</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1207904890877&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Battle Erupts Over Duke University Lacrosse Players&#8217; Web Site&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
It&#8217;s not an employment case, but we&#8217;re likely to see more and more of this in all practice areas.&amp;nbsp; The site is hosted by Blogger, which is (most often) free to create and maintain.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Has anyone faced a similiar situation in an employment case?&amp;nbsp; What about union organizaing/election?
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2008-04-14T14:07:21-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Defined Benefit Plans &#45; MIMINUM NUMBER of participants to maintain plan</title>
      <link>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/33/</link>
      <guid>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/33/#When:12:13:32Z</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;We are considering the freeze/partial freeze/eliminate question for our Defined Benefit plan.&amp;nbsp; We are trying to consider all issues while making this decision.&amp;nbsp; One issue that was brought to my attention by another HR professional is that there might be a MINIMUM NUMBER of participants required by ERISA in order to maintain a DB plan.&amp;nbsp; In other words, should we decide to only partially freeze the plan (and leave the plan in place for a grandfathered group of people with no new entries, and no new accruals), at what point would be be forced to totally eliminate the plan due to not meeting the minimum number of participants in that plan?
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2008-03-26T12:13:32-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Safe Harbor</title>
      <link>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/27/</link>
      <guid>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/27/#When:11:54:27Z</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Is the Safe Harbor program still in litigation?&amp;nbsp; I have not heard anything about letters of notification regarding SS discrepancy.
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2008-03-05T11:54:27-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Consulting w/ Litigation Counsel</title>
      <link>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/21/</link>
      <guid>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/21/#When:12:33:24Z</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I noticed that this particular folder needed a post, so I came up with some questions.&amp;nbsp; As HR professionals, how often do you consult with your outside/litigation counsel before making HR decisions?&amp;nbsp; Have you found such consultations to be helpful in the decision making process?&amp;nbsp; Do you consider it important to consult legal counsel before making decisions? And finally, do you keep outside/litigation counsel on retainer?&amp;nbsp; I would be interested to hear what people and businesses are doing.
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2008-03-04T12:33:24-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    <item>
      <title>Restrictive Covenant Litigation &#45; Challenging Protectable Interests</title>
      <link>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/29/</link>
      <guid>http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/forums/viewthread/29/#When:12:26:08Z</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Has anyone encountered a state of federal case, from any jurisdiction, in which the court refused to recognize an employer&#8217;s protectable interests as a consequence of the employer requiring a large group of its employees to execute noncompetes, regardless of exposure to confidential or proprietary information, and/or regardless of position?&amp;nbsp;  In other words, every employee must sign as a condition of employment, even if certain positions would not pose post&#45;separation threat to employer.&amp;nbsp; Thanks!
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <dc:date>2008-03-06T12:26:08-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>

    
    </channel>
</rss>