<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">

    <title type="text">Employment Law Forums</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/atom/" />
    <updated></updated>
    <rights>Copyright (c) 2011</rights>
    <generator uri="http://expressionengine.com/" version="1.7.0">ExpressionEngine</generator>
    <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:07:08</id>


    <entry>
      <title>Reduction in vacation/PTO maximum accrual limit</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/120/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:forums/viewthread/.120</id>
      <published>2011-07-08T13:44:22Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Naperville HR</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>We are looking at reducing the amount of vacation/PTO employees can accrue. Currently the limit is 200% (2 years) of our annual accrual. We would like to reduce it to 100% (1 year). I know if we abruptly reduced the maximum accrual we would be required to pay out the excess above the new maximum. However, if we phase in the reduction over 5-6 years I believe we can avoid such pay outs. The distinction is giving employees sufficient time to use the time needed to meet the new maximim accrual limits. Has anyone had experience doing this?</p>

<p>We are a municipal employer located in IL. </p>

<p>Thanks
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Prove you&#8217;re disabled!</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/119/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:forums/viewthread/.119</id>
      <published>2011-06-17T13:23:02Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Frank</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>One of our directors found an employee asleep on the job.&nbsp; He fired him.&nbsp; The employee said, &#8220;But I have a condition that makes me sleepy.&#8221;</p>

<p>The employee has been with us for awhile, and there&#8217;s never been any indication that he has any sleeping condition.&nbsp; He&#8217;s certainly never mentioned it.&nbsp; And, of course he has no documentation of it.</p>

<p>Now that the guy is gone, do you think we have to bring him back to engage in an interactive process and offer him his job back?&nbsp; Shouldn&#8217;t he have to provide some sort of doctor&#8217;s note or something?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Disclosing Name of Accused During an Investigation</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/118/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:forums/viewthread/.118</id>
      <published>2011-03-10T19:34:16Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Bob McKenzie</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Is is ever appropriate to disclose the name of the accused during an investigation of an anonymous complaint of harassment?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Workplace Wellness Toolkit</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/14/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2008:forums/viewthread/.14</id>
      <published>2008-02-26T11:39:00Z</published>
      <updated>2008-02-26T11:39:36Z</updated>
      <author><name>Patrick Della Valle</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>If you are interested, we have a <a href="http://www.elinfonet.com/blog/index/workplace_wellness/index/">workplace wellness toolkit</a> that you can download (it&#8217;s free).
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Notice versus Disability</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/116/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:forums/viewthread/.116</id>
      <published>2011-02-07T13:44:23Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>linda guyer</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>We are a small&#8212;less than 10&#8212;law firm in California.&nbsp; Our receptionist/vendor billing clerk gave me two weeks notice due to a change of circumstances at home she could not get her daughter to daycare and still get to work on time.&nbsp; Since she did not have a job, I suggested that she work through the end of the month (February) and we would accommodate her interviews and the like to help her out.&nbsp; I confirmed this in an email and she wrote back that what I had stated was correct.&nbsp; The next day she had an appointment (medical)&#8212;said she would be gone for a hour and change &#8212;she never came back - - but I did receive a fax from a psych saying she was disabled and he would revisit her issue next month.</p>

<p>What to do?&nbsp; I feel like her notice stands&#8212;she gave notice due to a change in circumstances at home.&nbsp; Department of labor does not answer the phone.&nbsp; Do I send her her &#8220;final&#8221; paycheck - - one sick day/one worked day plus a couple of hours; she has accumulated five or six days of vacation.&nbsp; I can run her paycheck for the couple of days - - should I cash out her vacation?&nbsp; Would that constitute &#8220;adverse employment action&#8221;?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Behavior Outside of Work</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/117/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:forums/viewthread/.117</id>
      <published>2011-02-17T19:15:19Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>dkillingsworth</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>I have just transitioned into the Public School system. Our policy committee is reviewing the policy regarding Committee Involvement. Does anyone have thoughts on this type of policy? As a public entity that deals with children our main concern is the defamation of the district based on actives by staff.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Burden of ADA notification</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/114/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:forums/viewthread/.114</id>
      <published>2011-01-05T18:48:57Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Frank</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Let&#8217;s assume for a moment that there is an employee who has developed asthma, among other things.&nbsp; He has been intermittently using FMLA leave per his doctor&#8217;s suggestion, over the last few months.&nbsp; He is close to using up all of his leave.</p>

<p>Let&#8217;s further assume he decides not to return to his position full time as the job requires, once his leave expires&#8230;or at least resists.</p>

<p>Does his employer have a duty to suggest that his condition may fall under the ADA and suggest accomodations, or is it his duty to request that?</p>

<p>Assume that it is clearly an undue hardship to allow him to return to his old position and only show up part time&#8230;.he could be accomodated by offering a part time position, but that would necessarily require a reduced salary, and fewer benefits.&nbsp; Is that an acceptable accomodation?</p>

<p>anyone?&nbsp; anyone?&nbsp; Bueller? anyone?
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>Internal Alternative Dispute Resolution Programs</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/115/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2011:forums/viewthread/.115</id>
      <published>2011-01-06T17:28:07Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Linda Bond Edwards</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>If you are a non-union employer, do you  currently have an internal alternative dispute resolution program?&nbsp; If so, has the program been successful? If not why not? If you don&#8217;t have one, have you considered adding one?&nbsp; Thanks
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>EEOC Submittals</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/113/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2010:forums/viewthread/.113</id>
      <published>2010-07-29T19:28:13Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Chuck Matthews, SPHR</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>Good Day,</p>

<p>I am currently preparing my position paper and response to an EEOC charge. Does anybody know if the EEOC will accept supporting documents on CD or DVD? I have several thousand e-mail messages to support my position and I would like to avoid the associated labor and printing costs. </p>

<p>Thank you in advance.</p>

<p>Kind regards,<br />
Chuck
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>

    <entry>
      <title>EEOC and requests for more information</title>
      <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.elinfonet.com/forums/viewthread/112/" />      
      <id>tag:elinfonet.com,2010:forums/viewthread/.112</id>
      <published>2010-07-07T11:46:09Z</published>
      <updated></updated>
      <author><name>Bob McKenzie</name></author>
      <content type="html">
      <![CDATA[
        <p>I had two EEOC charges in which the position statements were mailed over a year ago in one instance and 6 months ago in the second. These are pretty clear cut cases, or so I thought. </p>

<p>In the last week, I received requests for more information on both cases. It is also interesting that the requests were made by someone other than the original person at the EEOC we sent them to. The data the EEOC was asking for was voluminous to say the least.&nbsp; </p>

<p>I am also finding that the EEOC is communicating via e-mail which I have not seen in the past. Not that this is a big deal, it is just that I find it curious.&nbsp; On Friday, I received an e-mail from one of the investigators stating, &#8220;After reviewing the information submitted, it has become clear that I will need to conduct a site visit in connection with this complaint. I&#8217;ll contact you next week after the holiday. Have a great holiday weekend!&#8221; </p>

<p>This is a clear cut termination for cause. Besides the fact that my holiday weekend was ruined, I am wondering of others are experiencing such actions from the EEOC and what, if anything, this means.&nbsp; </p>

<p>Thanks in advance for your help.
</p>
      ]]>
      </content>
    </entry>


</feed>
