Proof of a workplace injury is not required to state a prima facie claim of retaliatory discharge under Ohio’s workers’ compensation statute, the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled, resolving a split among the Ohio Courts of Appeal. Onderko v. Sierra Lobo, Inc., Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-5027 (July 21, 2016)
Articles About Ohio Labor And Employment Law.
Ohio Becomes the Latest State to Legalize Marijuana for Certain Medical Uses While Avoiding Constitutional Ballot Initiatives
Last year, Ohio legislators found themselves caught in the middle of a media firestorm created by various pro-legalized marijuana groups who were politically savvy and financially funded enough to place multiple proposed constitutional amendments on Ohio’s November 2015 election ballot.
Ohio Federal Court Rejects Challenge to Application of Companionship Exemption to Home Health Aide
Last week, an Ohio, a federal judge held that a home health aide failed to demonstrate that she performed general housework unrelated to the care of her patients, and therefore qualified as a provider of companionship services under the Fair Labor Standards Act’s previous formulation of the “companion” exemption. As such, the home health aide was not entitled to the minimum wage or overtime. Foster v. Americare Healthcare Servs., Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166550 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 11, 2015).
The Midwest Employer Fall 2014
A bulletin on employment, labor, benefits, and immigration law.
Ohio Appellate Court Sporks Plaintiff in Plastic Cutlery Non-Compete Dispute
An Ohio appeals court recently held that an employee did not breach his non-competition agreement by creating his own business in the same industry as his former employer, despite the fact that the former employee contacted clients of his former employer and began compiling an inventory during his restricted period.
Ohio Law Does Not Prohibit Workplace Harassment Based on Sexual Orientation, Ohio Court Rules
An employee’s claim of sexual orientation harassment is not viable under the Ohio Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination because of sex, the Ohio Court of Appeals has ruled. Inskeep v. Western Res. Transit Auth., 2013-Ohio-897 (Ohio Ct. App. Mar. 8, 2013).
Workplace Injuries: Intentional Tort Claims in Ohio Are (Nearly) Dead in the Water
The Ohio Supreme Court delivered another blow to injured workers who attempt to skirt Ohio’s workers’ compensation system by pursuing a remedy for their injuries in court. On the heels of another opinion1 narrowly interpreting Ohio’s intentional tort statute, Ohio Revised Code section 2645.01, the Ohio Supreme Court, in Houdek v. ThyssenKrupp Materials N.A., Inc., Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-5685 (Ohio Dec. 6, 2012), confronted the question of whether an injured worker who brings an intentional tort claim against his or her employer is required to prove that the employer acted with a deliberate intent to injure. The court answered this question with an unequivocal “yes.”
Ohio’s Intentional Tort Statute Means What It Says
On November 20, 2012, in a reversal significant for Ohio employers with workplace injuries, the Ohio Supreme Court held, in Hewitt v. L.E. Myers, that an employee’s failure to use, or the employer’s failure to require an employee to wear, personal protective equipment does not constitute a deliberate removal of an equipment safety guard under Ohio’s intentional tort statute.
On Second Thought…: Ohio Supreme Court Corrects Itself on Enforceability of Non-Competes Transferred in Merger
Reconsidering and reversing its own decision, the Ohio Supreme Court now has decided an acquiring company in a merger could enforce employee non-compete agreements as if it had stepped into the shoes of the acquired company despite the absence of clear contract language to that effect. The Court, on May 24, 2012, in Acordia of Ohio L.L.C. v. Fischel (“Acordia I”), had answered that the agreements could not be enforced by the merged entity post-merger. Then, after agreeing on July 25th to take another look at the case, the Court on October 11th reversed its position, explaining it misread an earlier court decision regarding corporate mergers. Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-4648 (“Acordia II”).
The Ohio Supreme Court Reverses Its Position on the Enforceability of Noncompete Agreements after a Merger
In a rare procedural move, the Ohio Supreme Court reconsidered and reversed its May 24, 2012 decision in Acordia of Ohio, L.L.C. v. Fishel, 2012-Ohio-2297 (“Fishel I”). At issue was the enforceability of restrictive covenants in employee noncompete agreements subsequent to a merger. In Fishel I, affirming the decisions of the lower courts, the Ohio Supreme Court held that all assets and property, including employment contracts and agreements, transferred through operation of law to the resulting company post-merger. The merged company, however, was precluded from enforcing its predecessor’s noncompete agreements because the agreements did not contain language that extends to others, such as the company’s “successors or assigns,” and the noncompete agreements had expired as to all the employees involved.
Ohio High Court Eases Employee Requirement to Notify Employer of Workers’ Comp Retaliatory Discharge Claim
The Ohio Supreme Court has recognized a limited exception to the state’s general rule that a discharged employee must notify his former employer within 90 days of termination of the employee’s intent to file a retaliatory discharge lawsuit under Ohio’s workers’ compensation act (R.C. 4123.90). Resolving a conflict among the state’s appellate courts, it held that courts may delay the running of the 90-day notification period if the employee did not know that he had been discharged “within a reasonable time” after the employment action. Lawrence v. Youngstown, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-4247 (Sept. 20, 2012). The case now returns to the lower court for further proceedings.
Ohio Joins Handful of States that Offer Tort Liability Protections for Businesses that Hire and Employ Rehabilitated Ex-Offenders
In enacting protections from tort liability for negligent hiring and retention claims for businesses that hire and employ rehabilitated ex-offenders, Ohio joins a handful of other states that are introducing such measures to help facilitate the reintegration of ex-offenders into the workforce.
Ohio High Court: Terms of Non-Compete Agreements of Employees Acquired in Merger Determine Enforceability
The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that while non-compete agreements may be transferred by operation of law when two companies merge, the acquiring company may only enforce the agreements against the acquired employees according to the specific terms of the original agreement. Acordia of Ohio, L.L.C. v. Fishel, Slip Op. No. 2012-Ohio-2297 (May 24, 2012).
Ohio to Ban Texting While Driving
Ohio is poised to become the 39th state in the nation to ban texting while driving. Ohio’s ban on texting while driving passed in the legislature and is awaiting the Governor’s signature. The bill, HB 99, would ban writing, sending, or reading a text message on a handheld electronic wireless communications device while driving. An “electronic wireless communications device” includes a wireless telephone, a text-messaging device, a laptop or tablet computer, and other similar devices. Governor John Kasich has indicated he will sign the bill. The ban will go into effect 90 days following Governor Kasich’s signature; however, drivers will have a six-month grace period following the effective date during which authorities are permitted only to issue written warnings to drivers found in violation of the ban.