|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Report Link EEOC Wins Appeal of $3.4 Million in Pre-employment Strength Testing of Females (pdf).Phelps Dunbar LLP - April 17, 2007 As many employers know, pre-employment strength
testing of physical strength is quite common, particularly
in jobs requiring physical strength as part of an essential
job function. Report Link Courts Scrutinize Pre-Employment Strength Tests.Ford & Harrison LLP - January 22, 2007 In an effort to reduce on-the-job injuries, many employers have implemented, or are considering implementing, pre-employment strength tests. Report Link Ninth Circuit Finds Use of Hearing Test to Screen Driver Applicants Violates ADA.Ford & Harrison LLP - October 23, 2006 The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that United Parcel Service (UPS) violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by refusing to hire drivers who could not pass a hearing test. See Bates v. UPS (October 10, 2006). The Ninth Circuit’s decision affirms a lower court’s determination that the company violated the ADA and affirms the certification of a class action against UPS based on the ADA violation. Report Link Ninth Circuit Rules Policy that Excludes Deaf Drivers Violates the ADA, Opening the Door to More Class Actions Challenging Hiring Standards.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - October 23, 2006 In a decision issued earlier this month, Bates v. United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 04-17295 (9th Cir., October 10, 2006), a three-member panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that may generate a new wave of class action claims based upon the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Ninth Circuit upheld a trial court ruling that UPS's policy of excluding deaf individuals from being eligible for hire as drivers violated the ADA. In so ruling, the Court established a much lighter burden of proof for plaintiffs challenging a facially discriminatory qualification standard than that which is normally required. The Court also agreed that an ADA action challenging the application of a uniform qualifications standard may properly be brought as a class action. Report Link Use Of The "Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory" May Violate The ADA (pdf).Vedder Price - August 29, 2005 The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
(“MMPI”) is a test that determines where a person falls
on scales measuring traits such as depression, paranoia
and mania. On June 14, 2005, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Seventh Circuit held that the MMPI is a medical
examination and that its use by an employer in making
personnel decisions violated the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Karraker et al. v. Rent-A-Center et al.,
No. 04-2881. Report Link Premature Medical Exam May Invalidate Hiring Process.Jackson Lewis LLP - April 28, 2005 A decision from the federal appeals court in San Francisco has reinforced the admonishment that employers must follow the provisions of the Americans With Disabilities Act to the letter to avoid liability.
|
ArticlesFound: 6 ArticlesNO SUBTOPICSEmployment Law Seminars
Top Tips to Protect Your Workplace From Violence
Webinar
November 10, 2009 HR Learning Center LLCWorkplace Change in the Obama EraColumbus
November 10, 2009 Littler2009 Employment Practices ConferenceUniversal City
November 10, 2009 Ballard RosenbergFall Employment Law Mini-SeriesTysons Corner
November 10, 2009 LittlerBusiness Continuity During the H1N1 OutbreakWebinar
November 10, 2009 Littler"Action Steps for Upcoming Open Enrollment" Free E-BriefingWebinar
November 10, 2009 Ford & HarrisonLabor and Employment Law SeminarLos Angeles
November 11, 2009 OgletreeHR Network 2009 | RestonReston
November 12, 2009 CooleyThe Labor & Employment Compliance Costs of Federal ContractingWebinar
November 12, 2009 LittlerCalifornia Legally Required Sexual Harassment Training: It's Never Too Late to ComplyLa Jolla
November 12, 2009 Fisher & Phillips |
|
| ||
|
Terms of Use
|
Privacy
|
Advertising
|
About
|
Contact
|
For Law Firms
|
Partners
Copyright © 2009 elinfonet.com, llc.
The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.
This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations. As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law. None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice. The information should not be relied upon for legal advice. We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created. Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege. If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area. If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association. All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners. | ||
Federal Article Feeds