Welcome to our new bi-monthly series, where we compare employment law and practice from an international perspective, drawing on the experience of local and international employment lawyers who deal with these issues every day.

The first article in our series compares the new UK Government’s proposed changes to unfair dismissal protection with the law in Germany to see if there are any lessons that can be learned for UK employers from Continental Europe.

What’s to come in the UK?

How should an employer respond when an employee is accused, charged, or convicted of a crime?

Fortunately, this is not a day-to-day issue that HR teams tend to deal with, but when it does arise, it can raise complex employment law issues and employers may have a PR crisis on their hands.

Earl “Chip” Jones is quoted in this article on the issues surrounding compliance officers as whistleblowers.

Agenda

View Article (subscription required)

Kevin O’Neill co-authored this article about how employers can combat workplace bullying.

Corporate Counsel

View Article (subscription required)

Katherine Cooper Franklin co-authored this article about how employers can combat workplace bullying.

Corporate Counsel

View Article (subscription required)

As 2017 winds down, and the window closes to complete any mandatory training, Kevin O’Neill, Senior Director of Littler Learning Group, chats with Dawn McKenney-Maxwell of Littler’s Knowledge Management team about employer training initiatives. Kevin identifies hot topics – social media and bystander training, for example – and reviews employer anti-harassment training duties, particularly in California. Kevin discusses how training approaches continue to evolve and how employers can embrace new trends and technology to make employee training more effective.
 

Yesterday’s anti-harassment training won’t cut it in the #MeToo era. Employers must take stock of steps they have taken to prevent and stop sexual harassment in the workplace, and identify how they will answer the clear call for truly effective anti-harassment training.

Jennifer Youpa, a shareholder in Littler’s Dallas office, and Kevin O’Neill, Senior Director of Littler’s Learning Group, discuss the importance of harassment complaint investigations in the #MeToo climate. As Jennifer and Kevin explain, investigatory responses can no longer be “one size fits all,” especially with the possibility of the viral disclosure of allegations or incidents through social media. In this podcast, Jennifer and Kevin reveal strategies and trends they have seen as they conduct training for employers on sexual harassment and related issues.

In this podcast, Littler attorneys Michael Kessel, Russ McEwan and Alan Model, out of our Newark office, discuss the importance of cultivating “employee engagement” to foster a productive, invested workforce. They also describe the new Littler Positive Employee Relations Series, which offers customized, intensive training to supervisors on the causes of negative morale and then arms them with practical tools to spot and handle problems before they get out of hand.
 

UPDATE: This article was updated on August 15, 2018.

In April 2018, New York State and New York City each adopted expansive legislation directed at educating employees about workplace sexual harassment and reducing the incidence of harassment claims, as we reported in our prior article. 

New Poster for NYC Employers:

On August 29, 2018, Delaware Governor John Carney signed into law a bill (HB 360) addressing sexual harassment in the workplace. The new law broadly defines, and prohibits, sexual harassment and retaliation. The statute obligates employers (with 4 or more employees) to issue an information sheet on sexual harassment. It also requires larger employers (with 50 or more employees) to provide sexual harassment training for all employees and supervisors, making Delaware the fifth state to statutorily mandate sexual harassment training.

Earlier this year, New York State adopted anti-sexual harassment legislation that the Governor described as the "strongest and most comprehensive" in the country, and that is now fully effective. As of October 9, 2018, employers must distribute to all New York-based employees an updated anti-sexual harassment policy that covers a number of key areas. Over the next 365 days, employers also must train all New York-based employees regarding sexual harassment and retaliation, and repeat such training annually thereafter.

Happy New Year! As we turn the calendar to 2019, employers across the country are taking stock of recently-enacted workplace regulations on a wide variety of topics.¹

Employers in the Golden State, in particular, have a lot to juggle: new governor, new legislative session, and dozens of new labor and employment laws taking effect as of January 1.² These statutes touch on numerous issues, ranging from lactation accommodation to meal breaks for certain commercial drivers.³

Effective January 1, 2019, California SB 1343 greatly expanded Golden State employers' anti-harassment training requirements. The law not only extends coverage to employers with more than five employees, but it also mandates that employers provide anti-harassment training to all employees – not just supervisors – every two years. But what if an employer provided this training in 2018? Can the next training cycle wait until 2020? No, according to recent guidance from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH).

Last year, California enacted SB 1343,¹ amending California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) to expand employers' sexual harassment training requirements.  Previously, employers with 50 or more employees had to provide their supervisory personnel with two hours of sexual harassment prevention training every two years.

Bruce Sarchet, of Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute, and Marissa Dragoo with the Littler Learning Group, take a look at a new type of workplace training – bystander intervention training – that is now encouraged for California employers. This optional training teaches employees how to evaluate and respond to problematic behaviors in the workplace, empowering them to interrupt difficult situations, such as sexual harassment.
 

As we have previously reported,¹ New York State and New York City both enacted legislation in 2018 that require New York employers to train their employees in workplace sexual harassment prevention. The state training legislation went into effect on October 9, 2018, and the city training legislation went into effect on April 1, 2019.

On August 30, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 778, revising mandatory anti-harassment training deadlines, and resolving confusion about retraining requirements for certain employees who already received training in 2018 or 2019.

Helene Wasserman, Los Angeles-based Littler Shareholder and Trial Practice Group Co-Chair, reflects on some good, bad, and ugly impacts of the #MeToo movement since its inception, including recent legislative developments affecting California employers in particular. Discussing training, arbitration agreements, and the extended statute of limitations for FEHA claims with Littler Learning Group’s Marissa Dragoo, Helene provides insights and guidance for California employers as we move into the third year of the cemented #MeToo movement.
 

Asha Santos, Shareholder in Littler’s Boston office, explains the purpose of bystander intervention training and the value of diversity and inclusion sessions in today's workplace.
 

Update: On December 22, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction banning the enforcement of Executive Order 13950.

Bradford J. Kelley and James A. McGehee review a multimillion-dollar verdict for a U.S. Army veteran under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act and discuss the law's scope beyond other employment anti-discrimination laws.

Westlaw Today

View (Subscription required.)

Bradford Kelley comments on a case that he says shows several ways in which USERRA is more far-reaching than other employment anti-discrimination laws even though it gets less attention.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.) 

Barry Kuretzky discusses a recent Ontario Superior Court decision that punished an employer for trying to intimidate an employee through what the judge determined was a meritless counter claim.

Human Resources Director Canada

View (Subscription required.) 

Libby Henninger discusses the DOL’s proposal to expand overtime pay protections to more workers and why it may result in a legal battle.

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required.)

Alexander Thomas MacDonald discusses an upcoming Supreme Court case that may determine how much power the National Labor Relations Board should have. 

The Federalist Society

View

Thelma Akpan and Katelyn McCombs discuss a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision that reversed a long-held understanding of the Equal Pay Act and could have a significant effect on equal pay litigation.

Law360

View (Subscription required.)

On November 30, 2023, the Colorado Court of Appeals in Tender Care v.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has spoken, and employers that once relied exclusively on McDonnell Douglas might need to rethink their litigation strategy in employment-discrimination cases.

Update: This law was enacted on January 20, 2024.  It goes into effect March 20, 2024.

*  *  *

Jim Paretti weighs in on the NLRB’s latest effort to broaden the joint employer rule.

Law360 Pulse

View (Subscription required.)

Bradford J. Kelley says employers are increasingly using AI and other technology to measure or enhance worker productivity and efficiency.

Asian Robotics Review

View