News

[12/31] Jobless claims data paint bleak picture for 2009
[12/31] New filings for jobless benefits drop below 500K
[12/31] SC jobless benefits to continue as impasse ends
[12/31] SC unemployment fund could go broke without deal
[12/31] Jobless data expected to reinforce grim outlook
[12/30] Driver in hot water after plow falls through ice
[12/30] Secret ballot initiative backed by business group
[12/30] Wyoming sees benefits in new prison garment shop
[12/30] Unemployment climbs to 7.5 percent in Chile

More...

Articles

Employers and Social Host Liability

When employers sponsor after-work activities that include serving alcohol, can the employer be held liable for any injuries caused by employees who consumed the alcoholic beverages? In the majority of jurisdictions, the answer is no. Employers are not liable for the torts committed by employees who become intoxicated at work-sponsored social events. Courts in these jurisdictions have found that the consumption of alcohol and not the provision of alcohol causes the injury, thus making the employee liable.

More...

A Primer on Federal Employment and Anti-Discrimination Laws

Almost every employer is subject to extensive federal employment and anti-discrimination laws. The following is a primer on important federal employment and anti-discrimination laws.

More...

Case Summaries

[12/31] Haybarger v. Lawrence County Adult Prob. & Parole
In a case alleging violations of both federal and state antidiscrimination laws, plaintiff's employer is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from her Rehabilitation Act claim. Although the employer does not receive federal funds, it is one of many subunits of the Fifty-Third Judicial District, one of which receives federal funds.

[12/31] Palmer v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd.
Employee's complaint against the US Postal Service, alleging failure to credit him for annual and sick leave accrued while he was on leave without pay, was properly dismissed by the Merit Systems Protection Board for lack of jurisdiction. The employee: 1) was not denied return to work; and 2) did not allege failure to credit time spent on compensation for purposes of rights and benefits based on length of service, as required to vest the Board with jurisdiction over his complaint.

[12/31] Holmes v. Potter
Reduction in former postal employee's annuity was not a breach of the settlement agreement arising from his Rehabilitation Act claim, because although that agreement did set his retirement date: 1) the agreement did not discuss the amount of money he would be paid during retirement or how that retirement pay would be computed; and 2) the agreement was unambiguous, and therefore the mediator's statements to the plaintiff were inadmissible.

More...