Termination

Subscribe to Termination via RSS

As we noted earlier this year, the EEOC has begun filing legal challenges to relatively common provisions found in form severance agreements, based on the EEOC’s belief that such language unlawfully interferes with employees’ rights to file charges with and provide information to it. Last week, the EEOC’s attack on severance agreements was dealt a blow.
Continue Reading EEOC’s Attack On Severance Agreements Dealt Blow

This case demonstrates not only that clear and effective employment policies can be crucial to supporting employment decisions, but also that preparing in advance for responding to claims and participating in administrative proceedings will afford employers the best opportunity to successfully challenge non-qualifying UC claims. The employer was successful in this case because it presented relevant witness testimony and policies at the hearing. Employers can control overall unemployment compensation costs, send the right message, and maintain the integrity of its workplace policies and standards of conduct by challenging UC claims when warranted and sufficiently preparing in advance when responding to claims and participating in UC proceedings.
Continue Reading Long-Term Employee Ineligible for UC Benefits for Violating Workplace Conduct Policies

The National Labor Relations Board recently issued a somewhat surprising decision that provides useful guidance to employers facing employee misconduct. In Flex Frac Logistics, LLC, the Board found that an employee’s discharge for breaching the employer’s confidentiality policy was lawful, despite the Board’s finding that the confidentiality policy was unlawful.
Continue Reading NLRB Upholds Discharge for Deliberate Betrayal, Despite Reliance on Unlawful Policy

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously (Justice Kagan recused herself) in United States v. Quality Stores, Inc., Case No. 12-1408 that severance payments made to employees who were involuntarily terminated are taxable wages under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA). The decision overturns a previous ruling from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of Quality Stores which was seeking a $1 million tax refund from the IRS based on its claim that severance payments were not covered by FICA.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Clarifies that Severance Payments are Taxable

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a decision holding that an employer’s termination of an employee for violating a very broad and restrictive return to work agreement (RWA), which prohibited the employee from all drug and alcohol use during both work and personal time, was lawful.
Continue Reading Last Call! Third Circuit Court of Appeals Rules That Employer Can Terminate Employee For Violating Strict No Alcohol Return to Work Agreement

A Pennsylvania man lost his job in September 2012 and is now without unemployment compensation. Why? He called his boss a “clown.”

On October 17, 2013, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court affirmed the decision of an unemployment compensation Referee and the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review denying Alfonso Miller unemployment benefits.

Miller, a 5-year employee of a private Philadelphia-based organization providing comprehensive services to individuals with disabilities, had some choice words for his supervisor during his regularly scheduled performance evaluation. After calling his supervisor a “[expletive] clown” and referring to the entire evaluation process as a joke, Miller was fired from his job.
Continue Reading Calling Your Boss a Clown: No Laughing Matter

As we discussed with participants in our recent Labor and Employment Law Seminar, despite recent setbacks, the National Labor Relations Board continues to issue decisions that are concerning for employers. These decisions, which impact union and non-union employers alike, often take an expansive view of the protections afforded employees by the National Labor Relations Act. In a recent case involving a complaint filed by an (alleged) independent contractor working for a non-union employer, the Board found that the contractor’s electronic communications, directed at employees of a different employer, were protected by the Act because the communications constituted union organizing activity.

In New York Party Shuttle (pdf), the Board first considered whether the complaining party, a tour guide, was an employee or an independent contractor. The Tour Guide was regularly hired by Party Shuttle to provide guided tours of New York City. He also maintained his own tour company, and booked and provided tours through his own company. The Board held that Party Shuttle failed to establish that that the Tour Guide was an independent contractor. In making its decision, the Board applied a common law test that considers a multitude of factors and places the burden on the employer to establish independent contractor status. In this case, the Board found that Party Shuttle failed to establish that the tour guide as an independent contractor.

After determining that the Tour Guide was an employee, the Board turned to the next issue, the Tour Guide’s termination.Continue Reading NLRB Finds Discussions With Employees of Another Employer Can Constitute Protected Activity

For years, Pennsylvania courts have consistently denied unemployment compensation benefits to employees who accept early retirement incentive packages. Recently, however, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overruled this well-established precedent. In Diehl v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, the Supreme Court found that employees who accept early retirement packages offered pursuant to employer-initiated workforce reductions are eligible for…

Last year, we reported on the first National Labor Relations Board Administrative Law Judge decision examining an employee’s discharge for social media activity. Recently, the Board made Hispanics United its second decision examining an employee’s discharge for comments posted on Facebook. The Board held that the employer violated the National Labor Relations Act when it discharged five employees for criticizing another employee on Facebook. Although examining a new media, the Board stated that it was relying on established precedent to find that the activity in question was for “mutual aid or protection” within the meaning of Section 7 of the Act. Accordingly, the Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision ordering reinstatement of the discharged employees.
Continue Reading Board Affirms Decision Ordering Reinstatement of Employees Terminated for Facebook Comments

We have been getting a lot of questions from employers about how employees’ legal use of marijuana impacts an employer’s ability to enforce its drug testing policy. Colorado and Washington recently became the first states to approve the recreational use of marijuana, but numerous other states have legalized the use of marijuana for medical purposes for several years. Now employers are asking: what happens if an employee tests positive for marijuana under our workplace drug and alcohol policy, but says that he or she used marijuana legally either for medicinal purposes or while in a state that has legalized marijuana for all purposes?
Continue Reading Drug Testing Policies Up in Smoke?