Look Around HR

I have heard the term living wage on a number of occasions. It differs from the minimum wage in that it must keep up with the cost of living so that employees can afford housing, food, health care, etc. That means it can change with or without raising it. A number of cities across the country have some type of ordinance mandating the so-called “living wage.”

One such city is Hayward, California. A California appeals court recently upheld a $1.4 million lawsuit against Cintas for failing to pay the workers the required minimum with translated into $9.26 per hour with health insurance or $10.71 without. Reports say that Cintas paid the workers between $7 and $8.50 per hour.

By all accounts Cintas paid at or above the state minimum wage, it just did not pay attention to the living wage, which is where it went wrong. If you live in a municipality that has the living wage, it is just as important as you keep up with that wage as you would the minimum wage or other employment laws.

Isaiah Thomas and the New York Knicks made some unwanted headlines last winter when they were hammered with a multi-million dollar sexual harassment lawsuit. Now, it looks like NASCAR has themselves in legal hot water.

I must first admit I am a huge NASCAR fan, so this is kind of hard for me to see and read, but I will be honest and say that the accusations do not look good for the auto racing body.

From the Associated Press:

The 32-year-old Grant, who is black, worked as a technical inspector responsible for certifying cars in NASCAR’s second-tier Nationwide Series from January 2005 until her termination. In the lawsuit, she alleged she was referred to as “Nappy Headed Mo” and “Queen Sheba,” by co-workers, was often told she worked on “colored people time,” and was frightened by one official who routinely made references to the Ku Klux Klan.

In addition, Grant said she was subjected to sexual advances from male co-workers, two of whom allegedly exposed themselves to her, and graphic and lewd jokes.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, lists 23 specific incidents of alleged sexual harassment and 34 specific incidents of alleged racial and gender discrimination beginning when she was hired in January 2005 through her October 2007 firing.

More…

Grant said she routinely complained to her supervisors. Two weeks after her final complaint, Grant said she was warned during the week of August 18, 2007 at Michigan International Speedway that she had engaged in “conduct unbecoming of a NASCAR representative” and would be fired unless she changed her behavior. She said the warning stemmed from a confrontation with a track official who stopped her as she passed through a gate to use the restroom.

Roughly two months later, Grant was fired, and NASCAR cited a poor work performance in ending her employment. The lawsuit claims other than a previous warning for using “street” language, Grant had never been disciplined for job performance and routinely received positive reviews.

On the surface, it looks like there were a lot of problems going on, and it looks as though they went unanswered and in the end she was terminated for complaining. Of course, we will let this play out and see what happens (unless the sides settle out of court).

On NASCARs behalf, they have done a lot of work to work on their old redneck image and have many diversity programs including Drive for Diversity and the Diversity Internship Program.

To put it bluntly, is not a good idea. HREOnline has a good column up talking about the technological direction for all workplace employees. When we think of Blackberry’s or company laptops, we think of professionals and executives (those classified as exempt), but these devices are finding their way to hourly, non-exempt employees.

Non-exempt employees, of course, must be paid based on the hours they work and overtime if they work more than 40 hours per week. While no lawsuits related to this issue have been filed, several lawyers said they could see this problem coming in the near future.

“Up to now, it hasn’t been an issue, since most nonexempt employees don’t have BlackBerrys or laptops through which they communicate with their employers,” says Anthony Oncidi, chair of the Los Angeles-based Labor and Employment Department at Proskauer Rose.

“But with universal wireless connectivity coming on strong,” he says, “it won’t be long before nonmanagerial rank-and-file workers are given electronic access to the workplace. And once that happens, lawsuits will follow.”

If employers do begin to go this route, the best thing they can do is educate their employees on company policies. Let them know whether or not you want them checking e-mail at midnight or working on a project after dinner. If they are working from home (and non-exempt), you have to pay them. Of course, you could discipline them if they break company rules. But not paying them will only lead to bigger problems further down the road.

Remember the good ole days when fears of lawsuits were not hanging over your head on everything you do (I am only 23 so I don’t…). Now, we can only give out minimal information on things such as employment verifications. And the reason we do this is because we fear a lawsuit if you talk bad about an ex-employee and they don’t get that new job. So today’s take seems to be- as little information as possible.

Ready for the latest story that will make you scratch your head? A worker sued for workers comp because he hurt his foot at work. Sounds normal…but he hurt his foot rocking the snack machine in the break room trying to dislodge a candy bar that was stuck (h/t: HR Blunders).

This was done while on an unpaid lunch break and this is not part of his job responsibilities (although he is a maintenance worker).

The comp board ruled his claim could go forward because the event wasn’t a “recreational or social activity”. The insurance company appealed and the Court of Appeals reversed the initial decision and sent it back for further consideration. Read the case here.

The final decision has not been made yet, and we will keep you updated.

I guess we live in a world where we have to put a warning sign on the snack machine reminding employees not to shake it. I don’t know if this has more to do with frivolous lawsuits or an uneducated public.

P.S. It’s amazing the things people will do for their 75 cent candy bar.

I saw a headline on Google News today that made me look again and click on the story to see if it was actually true. The title, “Boss makes girls strip for job.” Yes, you heard that right.

According to ShortNews.com via The Sun:

45-year-old travel agent Andreas Stumpel has been sentenced to eight months in jail and ordered to pay £2,630 in compensation after pleading guilty to abusing a minor.

Stumpel had been forcing teenage girls to remove an item of clothing every time they answered incorrectly during job interviews. One 17-year-old who was afraid of not getting the position ended up naked except for a G-string.

This is so bizarre and so out of the ordinary; it does not merit a lot of comment. I know the no-no’s in an interview include you can’t ask things like their age or when they graduated from high school; but never would have imagined you might have remind that interviewer not to have the candidates stripping to get the job.