|
|
|
“Knowledge is power.”
-- Sir Francis Bacon
“Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s
ignorance.”
-- Confucius
“I’ve been doing this for a long time, I know what I’m
doing, and I don’t need anyone to tell me how to do my job.”
-- Many of the managers and executives CCG is hired to train
Managers and executives who know they lack basic employment law
knowledge are more likely to exercise caution and ask for help before
making a crucial decision. But those who are sure that they already
know everything they need to know usually keep moving forward – and
the lawsuits follow in their wake.
By definition, it is difficult to appreciate the significance of
what you don’t know. To help our clients learn the parameters
of the knowledge base they need to acquire, we test them by presenting
typical business scenarios that lead to legal trouble, and comparing
their decisions with the law’s requirements. To the left are
some examples.
Take our quiz, and see how you do. You might discover some risks
you never knew you had.
- The “I’m Disabled and I Need Some Time Off” ADA
Claim
For a couple of months, one of your company’s employees
has been slow in completing his work. The department manager
meets with him. The employee says he is suffering from an emotional
problem. Using the exact language of the Americans With Disabilities
Act (like many employees, he has been doing some reading on the
subject), the employee says he needs “a reasonable accommodation” – some
time off, and the ability to work at home for awhile.
Your department manager has been trained in the ADA, and he
knows the ADA requires that an employee with a disability has
to be given a reasonable accommodation under certain circumstances.
He also knows that mental problems can be “disabilities” under
the ADA. The employee does not really have the kind of job that
lends itself to working at home, but the manager figures he better
do something. So the manager tells the employee he can work at
home for a month, and the manager and the employee will meet
to reassess things at that time.
Did your manager do enough to keep your company out of jeopardy?
View
Mike Trachtman's video analysis
Text
only version
-
The "You Know You Did the
Right Thing But Can't Prove It" Dilemma
Mary is having a lot of difficulty learning the new computer
system. Her supervisor, Tom, has tried to counsel her about
her errors, but Mary is pleasant and seemingly hard-working
and tells him repeatedly how grateful she is for the opportunity
and how much she has learned since being in this position.
Tom likes her, but he’s finding himself re-doing the
work Mary does, and flat out doing the work she never completes.
Tom has also discovered that Mary has given out her password
to another employee so that he can “help” her with
some of her work, a clear and serious violation of the Company’s
Password Protection Policy.
Tom has had enough and calls Mary into the office to explain
that things just aren’t working out, and that her services
are no longer needed. Mary is surprised, but calm and leaves
the building without incident. Tom breathes a sigh of relief.
A week later, you get a call from Mary’s attorney. He
advises you that he is filing an EEOC claim on Mary’s
behalf alleging discrimination based on age (she just turned
50 and is the oldest in the group). According to the attorney,
Mary alleges that during the termination meeting, Tom commented
that Mary shouldn’t feel bad because “you just
can’t teach an old dog new tricks”.
You frantically
respond that Mary was let go for poor performance and violations
of company policy. The lawyer’s only response – PROVE
IT.
Can you?
View
Eileen Clark's video analysis
Text
only version
-
The “He Said-She Said” Sexual Harassment
Scenario
Jane works for Bob. After successfully completing a project,
Bob tells Jane he will treat her to lunch. The next day,
Jane sends an email to Bob's supervisor: “Yesterday,
Bob asked me to go to lunch with him. I was not sure that
was right, but he’s my boss. At lunch, he propositioned
me. I want something done about this.”
The supervisor knows Bob to be a dedicated family man. He
does not know Jane very well, but has no reason to believe
she is a liar. He calls Bob, and tells him what Jane said.
Bob is outraged, and denies everything. The supervisor then
calls Jane and tells her that Bob denies the accusation.
He asks if there were any witnesses. Jane says there weren’t,
but swears that what she said is true.
Faced with a “he said-she said situation", the
supervisor puts a memo in their files, and tells them both
to act responsibly,
and avoid any future situations that might cause problems.
Did the supervisor do enough? Is your company safe, or did
he hand Bob and Jane a lawsuit on a silver platter?
View Mike Trachtman's video analysis
Text only version
-
The
"Suspect Applicant" Predicament
You’ve been interviewing candidates for an accounting
position for weeks with no luck. You finally find someone
who is perfect for the position and can start right away.
As part of your typical hiring practice, you routinely
check applicants’ criminal history records. You are
about the make the offer when the background check comes
back … an arrest record for theft and a conviction
for driving without a license.
Your second choice is a less qualified individual who happens
to be a minority.
Despite the checkered past, you hire your first choice
anyway. What kind of trouble are you in?
View
Eileen Clark's video analysis
Text only version
-
The “Today I Am Your Employee-Tomorrow
I Am Your Competitor” Issue
Sam was legendary at the ABC Widget Company. He started
out on the manufacturing floor, and out-worked and out-learned
everyone else in the department. His product knowledge,
work ethic and personality made him a natural for sales,
and he did a great job, in a variety of territories.
He forged close relationships with customers, and after
two years, he became sales manager, then VP for Sales.
He handled the largest national accounts in the company,
and played a key role in developing ABC’s marketing
strategies, ranging from pricing to product development.
Then he quit and took a position with XYZ Widget Company.
Shortly thereafter, ABC’s key customers began to
switch their accounts. After that, ABC’s key sales
people transferred to XYZ. XYZ then put out some marketing
materials and pricing plans – all of which were
remarkably similar to what ABC had in the works. XYZ
put out press releases in the widget trade journals,
crowing about how Sam was making it a leader in the market.
Anything your company could have done to prevent this
all-too-common disaster scenario?
View
Mike Trachtman's video analysis
Text only version
- The "Exempt/Nonexempt" Paradox
Janet has been an excellent administrative assistant with your
Company for 25 years. In fact, she’s more than an administrative
assistant, she literally runs the office. Janet’s hourly
pay rate has increased substantially over the years in recognition
of her contribution and seniority, but it’s now way out
of range for her compensation grade. In fact, Janet is making
more than some of the managers, and she knows it. She feels strongly
that after all these years the Company owes her a promotion. “The
only way you get any respect in this place is to be salaried
and have a title.” She’s not looking for an increase
in pay, but she wants to be exempt and be officially recognized
as the office manager.
In her annual review, she expresses her dissatisfaction. “Look,
I’m here early and I stay late anyway, just think of all
the overtime money you’ll save if you make me salaried.” She
says to her manager. The manager is all for it and the promotion
is approved.
Everybody’s happy . . . or are they?
View
Eileen Clark's video
analysis
Text only
version
Back to top
|
