Smoking in the workplace is slowly becoming an antiquated notion. Federal and state laws ban smoking in some places, and an increasing patchwork of local ordinances decreases the availability of indoor and even outdoor smoking in some circumstances. Complicating matters, as it usually does, is the rise of new technology that straddles the line between permissible and impermissible conduct – the e-cigarette. The question employers now have to struggle with is whether these devices, which purport to alleviate the harmful effects of smoke on both the user and those inhaling second-hand, should fall under broad workplace bans on smoking.

The Supreme Court recently ruled unanimously that government employees who testify about public corruption are protected by the First Amendment. The case, Lane v. Franks, [1]centered on a public employee, Lane, who worked at an Alabama community college where he led the school’s program for at-risk youth.

Unemployment Benefits Refresher, Part II

 A common administrative headache for employers is dealing with terminated employees who go on to seek unemployment benefits. While an employer has the right to challenge the award of unemployment benefits, choosing to do so requires careful consideration.  The process can be time-consuming and may require a commitment of more resources than one would like.  Additionally, challenging an award of unemployment benefits may serve to push a former employee into litigation that he or she may not have pursued otherwise.  That being said, if an employer has good documentation regarding a termination and clear, uniformly enforced employee policies, challenging a claim for unemployment benefits can be successful.