The Minnesota Supreme Court recently issued what could turn out to be a significant opinion on the legal standard governing sexual harassment cases under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). At issue in Kenneh v. Homeward Bound, Inc. (Minn. 6/3/2020) was whether the requirement that workplace harassment be “severe or pervasive,” adopted from
One of the first employment lawsuits related to COVID-19 was filed in Iowa last week. A former Dallas County Jail employee alleges he was fired because he called a Department of Corrections “hotline” to report concerns about working with a colleague infected with the virus. Jail employees were informed one of their co-employees tested positive
We have discussed (here and here) the problem of the reluctant employee. That is, a furloughed employee who resists the call to return to the workplace because of fear (or at least a perceived or claimed fear) of COVID exposure.
This post tackles the opposite problem: the reluctant employer. A furloughed
March 27 saw the Iowa Supreme Court grant further review in not one but two important drug-testing cases. Besides deciding to hear Dix v. Casey’s General Stores, Inc. (covered here), the Court also granted review in Woods v. Charles Gabus Ford, Inc. (19-0002). Charles Gabus challenges the Court of Appeals’ ruling that it failed
Although the timetable allowing businesses to reopen is different in every state, most businesses are starting to plan for the inevitable day when employees will be allowed to return to the workplace and resume business operations at least in some form. In Iowa, the Governor’s April 27 proclamation loosened restrictions in 77 Iowa counties.
As if the massive disruption resulting from the Coronavirus is not enough, mid-size employers must remain alert to union efforts to organize your workforce and petition for an election in the midst of the ongoing crisis.
Two recent events give rise to the concern that unions will be aggressive in their organizing efforts in this
Last week, the Supreme Court granted further review in Dix v. Casey’s General Stores, Inc. (18-1464), a case under Iowa’s drug-testing statute (which covers alcohol testing too). In Dix, the Iowa Court of Appeals held among other things that two-light duty workers weren’t in “safety-sensitive positions” and that the statute’s immunity protects employers only against
Lawyers and law firms have done a great job providing information and analysis about the Families First Coronavirus Relief Act (FFCRA). I’m especially proud of our team at Fredrikson & Byron for their heroic efforts putting together the firm’s Coronavirus Resource Center. Despite the flood of information, however, many practical questions about day-to-day
“Mistakes happen. Including in the context of employment decisions. But not every mistake amounts to actionable employment discrimination.” Smith v. Towne Properties Management Co., Inc. (6th Cir. 3-4-2020).
So stated the Sixth Circuit in affirming the grant of summary judgment to the employer in a FMLA and disability discrimination lawsuit. The plaintiff, Robyn Smith, was
Many employers use job applications that ask applicants to disclose their salary or wages at prior jobs. Sometimes the question comes up in an interview. Employers have many potential motives for asking the question: perhaps to determine what compensation the applicant will expect if hired; to determine whether the applicant would fit within the position’s
