FMLA Update: New Poster and Employer Guide

By Stearns Weaver Miller on April 27, 2016 Posted in Disability & Leave, Legislation & Regulations

The Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has been busy with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) this week!

New FMLA Poster

There is a new FMLA General Notice, aka FMLA poster: Employee Rights Under The Family and Medical Leave Act. The substantive information about the FMLA is generally the same as the February 2013 poster (the one you currently have posted), but the poster has been redesigned and the DOL’s contact information for “additional information or to file a complaint” is printed in much larger type and highlighted with a green background. The poster also includes a QR Code, which when scanned should take you to the DOL’s Wage & Hour Division home page.

The new poster is dated 04/16, so it is effective immediately. However, you do not have to immediately change the posters in your workplace because, per the DOL, the “February 2013 version of the FMLA poster is still good and can be used to fulfill the posting requirement.” (The DOL did not give any indication of when the February 2013 poster will expire.) This is good news if you have the all-in-one posters or have printed employee handbooks which contain a copy of the poster as part of your FMLA policy.

When You Really Have to Go, Do You Ever Think About It?

By Stearns Weaver Miller on April 19, 2016 Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Employee Handbooks & Policies

Ver la versión en español aquí

Transgender Status and the Bathroom Question

With North Carolina recently passing a state law which requires a transgender person to use the restroom that matches their sex at birth, the question many Floridians are asking now is: If a person is transgender, or has a gender identity or expression different than the one assigned at birth, which bathroom in Florida would he or she use?

There is currently no codified language in the federal statutes that directly addresses bathroom use in the context of transgender status. Yesterday, however, a federal appeals court for the Fourth Circuit (which covers five states, including North Carolina) ruled on the issue pursuant to Title IX, which is the federal law that prohibits gender discrimination in schools. The Court held that under Title IX, students have a protected right to use the bathroom that corresponds to their deeply felt gender identity, regardless of their gender assigned at birth.

In addition, some federal agencies, including the EEOC and OSHA, have taken the position that employees enjoy certain protections when it comes to bathroom use and their gender identity or expression, or transgender status. Increasingly, states and municipalities are also enacting legislation addressing the “bathroom question.” Florida state law is silent on transgender, gender identity and expression issues. Miami-Dade and Broward Counties have prohibited discrimination based on gender identity and gender expression, but no decisions have been issued regarding bathroom use. While the law continues to evolve (and quickly), some employers have taken a proactive approach to gender identity and the “bathroom question.”

Let’s break it down.

You Show Me Yours and I’ll Show You Mine… Or Not!

By Lisa Berg on April 11, 2016 Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Legislation & Regulations

Ver la versión en español aquí

If I were to challenge you to a game of high stakes poker, would you accept the challenge if you had to show me your cards but I did not have to show you mine? Of course not! But, that’s exactly what the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) is asking employers to do.

Here’s the skinny . . . most employers respond to a charge of discrimination by submitting a position statement refuting the allegations and attaching copies of policies, personnel files, payroll records, comparative evidence, etc., and other confidential information to support their position. Previously, many EEOC field offices (including Miami) had not shown the employer’s position statement or exhibits to the employee/complainant (“Charging Party”). Rather, the EEOC provided verbal or written summaries of the employers’ side of the story. Well, the rules have changed drastically.

Florida Campaign Contribution Guidelines for Private Employers

By Glenn Burhans, Jr. on April 6, 2016 Posted in Employment Contracts & Corporate Issues

Ver la versión en español aquí

Tired of hearing about the election yet? Well, the race has just begun and the dash for cash will only intensify as candidates sprint toward the August 30 primary election.

As an HR professional, it is important that you be familiar with Florida’s campaign contribution guidelines to ensure that your company is complying with the law. I recently wrote an alert outlining the main guidelines under Florida law and how they relate to your business and employees. Check it out!

Register here for our 26^th Annual Labor & Employment Law Seminar from 8am-4pm on Friday, May 20, 2016 at the JW Marriott Marquis Miami.

REGISTRATION OPEN! 26th Annual Labor & Employment Law Seminar

By Robert Turk on April 1, 2016 Posted in Legislation & Regulations

Ver la versión en español aquí

Psst- I’ve got a secret! Registration is now open for our 26th Annual Labor & Employment Law Seminar! Join us on Friday, May 20th from 8 am – 4:00 pm at the beautiful JW Marriott Marquis Miami.

Past attendees requested dual track content on legal issues such as FLSA, ADA and FMLA. We’ve heard you! Following our morning sessions, you can choose from our “high-speed” track designed for experienced HR professionals or our “Hop Aboard” track covering broader HR fundamentals.

View the full agenda and speaker bios.

Be sure to register early! Space is limited and you don’t want to miss the train(ing)!

Looking forward to seeing many friends who have joined us from past seminars and to meeting first-time attendees!

New OPT Rule for STEM Grads – Some Good, Some Not So Good?

By Glenn Rissman on March 21, 2016 Posted in Hiring/Termination, Immigration

STEM-01

Ver la versión en español aquí

For the last several months, foreign students in F-1 status and potential employers have been living in limbo. A federal district court invalidated the Department of Homeland Security’s rules providing additional time in Optional Practical Training for STEM graduates (graduates with degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, or Math). The same court decision invalidated what has become known as the Cap Gap extension. On March 11, DHS issued a new rule, making some significant changes to the OPT STEM extension.

F-1 students are eligible for twelve months of Optional Practical Training (OPT) following graduation from a U.S. college or university. Under the new rule, STEM graduates may qualify for twenty four additional months of Optional Practical Training. (The invalidated rule had provided for a seventeen month extension.) Here are some of the details:

Employees Behaving Badly II: Did He Really Say That?

By Stearns Weaver Miller on March 8, 2016 Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Employee & Management Counseling, Employee Handbooks & Policies

Ver la versión en español aquí

I am not a fan of reality TV. However, in this reality TV election season, it is hard to tear my eyes (and ears) away from the barbs being exchanged primarily between the Republican candidates. Whether you support him or not, you have to admit that Donald Trump says things that make people cringe. From an HR perspective, the verbal lobs tossed by Mr. Trump offer a minefield of potential discrimination claims if they were delivered in the employment setting.

Imagine that Donald Trump was one of your supervisors or plant manager. You might [read: would] have a problem. Let’s issue spot some of his comments.

Law Would Ban Florida Employers from “E-Stalking”

By Stearns Weaver Miller on March 3, 2016 Posted in Employee Handbooks & Policies, Legislation & Regulations

Ver la versión en español aquí

Not long ago, we blogged about social media as a blessing and a curse for employers. On the one hand, social media helps businesses market products and services; on the other, social media provides employees with an easily-accessible platform to draw negative attention to the business.

To prevent (or minimize) this negative attention, a small universe of employers has implemented policies requiring employees to turn over their usernames and passwords so that employers can monitor employee social media accounts – a practice that has been coined by some as “E-Stalking.” Some employers believe that the policies may: (a) protect against the disclosure of proprietary information or trade secrets; (b) ensure compliance with financial regulations; and (c) diminish exposure to legal liability.

Under current law, the Florida Legislature believes that employers can ask for log-in information and refuse to hire or even discipline employees who do not provide the information. Accordingly, lawmakers who view these “E-Stalking” policies as invasive of privacy interests have taken steps to prohibit them. Florida has joined a long list of states that have either passed, or are attempting to pass, legislation that would prohibit employers from requesting log-in information. If passed, Florida House Bill 635 and Senate Bill 186 (which would take effect October 1, 2016) would make it illegal for a Florida employer to ask for any usernames or passwords to employee or applicant social media accounts. The proposed legislation would not prevent an employer or potential employer from conducting a general search that turns up publicly-available information, such as a Facebook page that is available to the public.

Chopping Down Workplace Cherry Trees

By Stearns Weaver Miller on February 26, 2016 Posted in Employee & Management Counseling

Ver la versión en español aquí

We all recall the myth of George Washington and the Cherry Tree. Washington told his father that he could not tell a lie and that he had in fact tried to chop down his father’s cherry tree. His father then praised young George and embraced him for his honesty.

A friend recently relayed to me his exasperation with his daughter’s prep school. It seems the student engaged in some teen-aged antics with a few classmates, and after admitting her involvement, was expelled from school. However, her classmates, who denied involvement, were not punished because the school could not prove their complicity. Surely the school has a right to discipline as it deems proper, but are they sending the right message to the student who cooperates in an investigation and is honest about her commission of a minor transgression?