The Sixth Circuit (encompassing Kentucky, Michigan, Tennessee and Ohio) recently sent a strong message that baseless suits against employers will not survive summary judgment. The case, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Kaplan Higher Education Corp. et al., No. 13-3408 (6th Cir., Apr. 9, 2014), involved the use of credit checks in hiring decisions.

Dealing with employees who abuse FMLA can be difficult. Letting abuse run rampant, however, can impact business productivity and put a damper on company morale (as present employees often have to pick up the slack of someone on leave). Employers who detect abuse must proceed with caution because it is very easy to run afoul of regulations.

The Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) permits eligible employees to take up to 12 work weeks of leave during a 12-month period if a serious health condition makes the employee unable to perform the functions of his or her position. When an employer suspects that an employee is abusing the FMLA leave, employers may feel caught in a classic Catch-22. They can ignore the abuse and operate with a reduced workforce, or subject themselves to an interference or defamation suit if they decide to challenge or confront the employee about the questionable leave.

The Department of Labor recently issued a reminder to employers involved in the mining industry. As spring (slowly) approaches, surface mines will reopen. As miners head back to the job site and prepare equipment for the new season, potential for injury is high.

Employers and business professionals are no strangers to “off-the-record” conversations and closed-door meetings. In today’s world, though, many long for a way to converse online without a permanent record of the conversation existing somewhere out there in Internet-land. New apps have responded to this need; think Snapchat (the popular app that allows users to set a predetermined time for how long recipients can view their photos) for text messaging. TigerText, Wickr, and Confide are just some of the self-destructing text apps that have recently emerged. Businesses, however, should proceed with caution when using these – they could not only present an air of impropriety but also be a legal hazard.

Much of the anxiety that a Department of Labor (“DOL”) Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) investigation causes is due to the mystery of the investigative process. In this case, what you don’t know can hurt you. If an employer is unaware of the process or its demands, too much or too little information may be handed over – resulting in negative consequences. Let’s take a look at how the investigation will be conducted once the DOL investigator steps inside the workplace.

The United States Department of Labor (“DOL”) conducts workplace inspections for potential violations of wage and hour laws. Employers often place frantic telephone calls to their lawyer when an investigator from the Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) knocks on their door for good reason: a DOL investigation should be  taken seriously. Any last-minute attempt to pass muster typically falls short, and leaves an employer in violation of wage and hour laws which may subject them to hefty fines. A violation can result in wage restitution, interest, and liquidated damages.  Preparedness is key, and an employer’s institution of the following five guidelines can drastically improve their position should the DOL initiate an investigation.

In recent years, policy makers in numerous states have considered banning welfare, unemployment benefits or workers’ compensation to employees or ex-employees who test positive for drug use. Proponents say that public monies should not be given to those who engage in illicit drug use and likely misuse payments on their addiction. Opponents say that these policies target the already-vulnerable who may be trying to get back on their feet and argue that drug testing procedures can be just as costly as the doled-out payments. The Kentucky legislature may take up the issue in 2014, as it has already showed interest in such measures during past sessions.

As most employees and employers are aware, a standard employment application normally includes a box or line item for the applicant to document whether he/she has ever been convicted of a crime. In the employment relations realm, however, there exists a growing initiative to “ban-the-box” – meaning that job applications no longer ask about one’s criminal history.

On Monday we discussed the basic framework for providing employees with days off during recognized religious holidays.  A related issue commonly presented during the holiday season is whether employees must be paid for their time off.