Showing posts with label USERRA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USERRA. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Veterans are returning home and re-entering the workforce in growing numbers: are you prepared?
Lexology
LeClairRyan
Sarah E. Moffett
USA
May 3 2012
As the United States’ various engagements in the Middle East wind down, military service members are returning home in growing numbers. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), three million veterans have returned from military service over the past ten years, and another million are expected to return to civilian life over the next five years. Many of these returning service members will be joining, or re-joining, the civilian workforce.
An array of federal laws exist that protect veterans’ rights to employment and reemployment. Below is a brief summary of the key laws and regulations that employers should keep in mind.
Full Story: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ad7e79ea-0d1f-4f32-80b8-21452926d0a0&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+Federal+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2012-05-22&utm_term=
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Legal Alert: USERRA Expanded to Include Hostile Work Environment Claims
Ford & Harrison Legal Alert
1/30/2012
J. Evans, Terry Price
Executive Summary: On November 21, 2011, President Obama signed into law the VOW to Hire Heroes Act of 2011. The new law contains three main provisions: (1) amends and expands the protections under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA); (2) amends the Internal Revenue Code to provide certain tax credits to tax-exempt companies that hire unemployed veterans; and (3) creates new and expanded education, training, and transition programs for veterans within the federal Departments of Labor and Veterans Affairs. The first provisions of the new law (amendment to USERRA) may make it easier for employees (including former, part-time and probationary employees) to sue their employers for discrimination related to their military status.
Full Story: http://www.fordharrison.com/shownews.aspx?Show=7973
1/30/2012
J. Evans, Terry Price
Executive Summary: On November 21, 2011, President Obama signed into law the VOW to Hire Heroes Act of 2011. The new law contains three main provisions: (1) amends and expands the protections under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA); (2) amends the Internal Revenue Code to provide certain tax credits to tax-exempt companies that hire unemployed veterans; and (3) creates new and expanded education, training, and transition programs for veterans within the federal Departments of Labor and Veterans Affairs. The first provisions of the new law (amendment to USERRA) may make it easier for employees (including former, part-time and probationary employees) to sue their employers for discrimination related to their military status.
Full Story: http://www.fordharrison.com/shownews.aspx?Show=7973
Monday, May 23, 2011
Practical Effects of ‘Cat’s Paw’ Ruling in USERRA Case Still Unclear for Employers
Workforce Management
The Supreme Court said the ‘singular influence’ test was too restrictive in light of USERRA, which states that an employer may be held liable for discrimination if a person’s membership in the military is a ‘motivating factor’ in the employer’s action. By George Wood
May 2011
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a hospital worker could sue his former employer for the animosity of supervisors who did not make the ultimate decision to fire him.
The decision struck down a narrow version of the so-called cat’s paw theory of employer liability. But its practical effects for employers are unclear.
Full Story: http://www.workforce.com/archive/feature/legal/practical-effects-cats-paw-ruling-userra-case-still/index.php
The Supreme Court said the ‘singular influence’ test was too restrictive in light of USERRA, which states that an employer may be held liable for discrimination if a person’s membership in the military is a ‘motivating factor’ in the employer’s action. By George Wood
May 2011
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a hospital worker could sue his former employer for the animosity of supervisors who did not make the ultimate decision to fire him.
The decision struck down a narrow version of the so-called cat’s paw theory of employer liability. But its practical effects for employers are unclear.
Full Story: http://www.workforce.com/archive/feature/legal/practical-effects-cats-paw-ruling-userra-case-still/index.php
Monday, March 7, 2011
Employer Liable for Discriminatory Adviser in Firing: Supreme Court
Workforce Management
March 1, 2011
The high court ruled 8-0 in favor of overturning the 7th Circuit opinion, with Justices Samuel Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas supporting a concurring opinion, and Justice Elena Kagan not taking part in the decision.
Employers can be held liable for discriminatory conduct even if the person making the decision was not discriminatory but relied in part on those who were, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled March 1.
The court’s unanimous ruling in Vincent E. Staub v. Proctor Hospital supports what is called the “cat’s paw” theory of liability.
According to the opinion, Staub, an angiography technician at Proctor Hospital in Peoria, Illinois, was a member of the U.S. Army Reserve, which required him to attend drills one weekend per month and train full time two to three weeks a year.
Full Story: http://www.workforce.com/section/news/article/employer-liable-discriminatory-adviser-firing-supreme.php
March 1, 2011
The high court ruled 8-0 in favor of overturning the 7th Circuit opinion, with Justices Samuel Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas supporting a concurring opinion, and Justice Elena Kagan not taking part in the decision.
Employers can be held liable for discriminatory conduct even if the person making the decision was not discriminatory but relied in part on those who were, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled March 1.
The court’s unanimous ruling in Vincent E. Staub v. Proctor Hospital supports what is called the “cat’s paw” theory of liability.
According to the opinion, Staub, an angiography technician at Proctor Hospital in Peoria, Illinois, was a member of the U.S. Army Reserve, which required him to attend drills one weekend per month and train full time two to three weeks a year.
Full Story: http://www.workforce.com/section/news/article/employer-liable-discriminatory-adviser-firing-supreme.php
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Employers’ Legal Obligations to Employees in the Military
Workforce Management online
October 2007
Hiring citizen soldiers has great benefits, but there are also strict laws governing their treatment that every employer needs to know. By Jeffrey Schieberl and Charles P. Leo
Citizen soldiers bring many assets to the workplace: They tend to follow instructions and respect authority; they have leadership skills and work well in organizations. Some have service-acquired skills that translate well in the business community such as computer skills. With these many talents provided to the employer come responsibilities.
This article is intended to bring to the attention of employers the legal obligations they have to employees who have been called to active military duty or who are members of the United States National Guard or Reserves. For example, what obligations, if any, does an employer have to re-employ a veteran in the position they held before being called to active duty? What if doing so displaces another employee or results in hardship for the employer?
While there are benefits in having a citizen soldier as an employee, employers must be prepared to address these difficult questions along with several others that flow from the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-Employment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA).1 Unlike some other federal laws that apply only if the employer has a certain number of employees, USERRA applies to all employers.
If you are wondering if these challenges will present themselves to your business organization, consider what the Pentagon has reported: As of August 2005, more than 141,000 members of the United States National Guard and Reserve military forces have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Currently, those forces comprise more than 35 percent of all U.S. military forces actively serving in the region.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/03/feature/25/15/73/251592.html ]
October 2007
Hiring citizen soldiers has great benefits, but there are also strict laws governing their treatment that every employer needs to know. By Jeffrey Schieberl and Charles P. Leo
Citizen soldiers bring many assets to the workplace: They tend to follow instructions and respect authority; they have leadership skills and work well in organizations. Some have service-acquired skills that translate well in the business community such as computer skills. With these many talents provided to the employer come responsibilities.
This article is intended to bring to the attention of employers the legal obligations they have to employees who have been called to active military duty or who are members of the United States National Guard or Reserves. For example, what obligations, if any, does an employer have to re-employ a veteran in the position they held before being called to active duty? What if doing so displaces another employee or results in hardship for the employer?
While there are benefits in having a citizen soldier as an employee, employers must be prepared to address these difficult questions along with several others that flow from the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-Employment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA).1 Unlike some other federal laws that apply only if the employer has a certain number of employees, USERRA applies to all employers.
If you are wondering if these challenges will present themselves to your business organization, consider what the Pentagon has reported: As of August 2005, more than 141,000 members of the United States National Guard and Reserve military forces have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Currently, those forces comprise more than 35 percent of all U.S. military forces actively serving in the region.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://www.workforce.com/section/03/feature/25/15/73/251592.html ]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)