http://www.elinfonet.com/starticles/39 Articles discussing workplace law in Pennsylvania. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:02:16 EST en-us http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3892 Article: 3892 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) The 3d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a health clinic’s statements to a physician and to immigrations officials regarding the physician’s “at least three year” employment commitment did not create an employment contract that would override the doctor’s employment at will status. Edwards v. Geisinger Clinic, 3d Cir., No. 11-1528, Jan. 23, 2012. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3882 Article: 3882 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) In Bricklayers of Western Pennsylvania Combined Funds, Inc. v. Scott’s Development Company, [pdf.] an en banc panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania held that the trustees of employee benefit funds may assert mechanics’ liens against a property owner to recoup delinquent contributions owed by a contractor. In Scott’s Development, the property owner, Scott’s Development Co. (“Scott’s”) contracted with J. William Pustelak, Inc. (“Pustelak”) to perform construction work on its property. Pustelak was a party to collective bargaining agreements with two unions, under which Pustelak was to contribute to employee health and pension funds. After Pustelak failed to pay the required contributions, the trustees of the funds filed mechanics’ lien claims against Scott’s, seeking recovery of the contributions that Pustelak allegedly failed to make. In an issue of first impression, the Superior Court held that the trustees had standing to assert mechanics’ lien claims against the property owner. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3870 Article: 3870 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) In Best Medical International, Inc. v. Spellman, a federal court in Pennsylvania determined—in a case of first impression—that attorneys' fees may be awarded to the prevailing defending party under the Pennsylvania Uniform Trade Secrets Act ("PUTSA") when it has demonstrated: http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3863 Article: 3863 Thu, 12 Jan 2012 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) When may attorneys’ fees be imposed on a plaintiff for prosecuting a claim for misappropriation of trade secrets in bad faith under the Pennsylvania Uniform Trade Secrets Act (PUTSA)? In a matter of first impression, in Best Medical International v. Spellman [pdf], a Pennsylvania district court held that bad faith justifies attorneys’ fees when two criteria are met: http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3759 Article: 3759 Fri, 11 Nov 2011 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) As of July 1, 2012, certain employers in Philadelphia will have to provide their employees with paid sick leave. A recently enacted ordinance amends Chapter 17-300 of the Philadelphia Code, titled "Philadelphia 21st Century Minimum Wage and Benefits Standard." http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3743 Article: 3743 Tue, 08 Nov 2011 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) Certain Philadelphia employers will be required to provide full-time employees with paid sick leave beginning July 1, 2012. The City Council voted 15-2 in support of the measure and Mayor Michael Nutter did not veto it. The new Ordinance, an amendment to Chapter 17-1300 of the Philadelphia Code, is entitled, “Philadelphia 21st Century Minimum Wage and Benefits Standard”. Mayor Nutter previously vetoed a broader paid sick leave bill, which would have applied to all Philadelphia employers with more than five employees. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3584 Article: 3584 Tue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) A Philadelphia County state court judge recently issued a preliminary injunction in favor of a law firm against a former associate enforcing a 60-day notice provision. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3445 Article: 3445 Wed, 11 May 2011 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) Effective June 17, 2011, Philadelphia’s new Fair Criminal Record Screening Standards Ordinance generally will prohibit Philadelphia employers from asking job applicants questions related to criminal history prior to or during the first interview. Similar to restrictions applicable to Massachusetts and Hawaii employers, the “ban the box” law will prohibit Philadelphia employers from obtaining criminal background information on an initial employment application. The Ordinance applies to employers that employ 10 or more persons within the City of Philadelphia. http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3444 Article: 3444 Tue, 10 May 2011 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) Philadelphia is the latest city to prohibit employers from asking job applicants to disclose their criminal history. The Fair Criminal Record Screening Standards (PDF) was signed by Mayor Nutter on April 13, 2011, and goes into effect on July 13. The purpose of the new law is to increase employment opportunities for candidates who have a criminal history by ensuring that the candidate will be “judged on his or her own merit during the submission of the application and at least until the completion of one interview.” http://www.elinfonet.com/newscount.php?stateID=3426 Article: 3426 Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:00:00 EST webmaster@elinfonet.com (Employment Law Information Network) City of Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter recently signed legislation prohibiting employers from making certain inquiries into the criminal history of a job applicant. The legislation, dubbed the “Ban the Box” law after the check box on job applications asking individuals if they have ever been convicted of a crime, prohibits employers from: