Posted by marykeating on September 28, 2010 under Economic situation | 
The President signed a new bill into law yesterday called the Small Business Jobs Bill, intended to provide a jumpstart to hiring by small businesses. I am not able to add to the punditry on the economic theory underlying these initiatives. For example, the hiring act credit provided to businesses that added new workers has been largely ignored.
This initiative may address one of the reported root problems, however, that of obtaining credit. The bill provides more funding to SBA, and reduces the fees. In addition, there are tax incentives offered to small businesses, which may make the difference in small businesses deciding to make capital investments.
There are also some tax breaks, including an increase in the amount of business equipmetn expenses that may be deducted immediately, and increase the deduction for start-up expenses. In addition, this bill permits self-employed people to deduct the cost of their personal health insurance during 2010.
Three of the people invited to attend the signing ceremony are Maryland business owners who are in hiring mode, and expect to use the provisions of this new law to grow further.
Posted by marykeating on September 22, 2010 under disability discrimination |
The EEOC has filed complaints against three companies to redress what seems to be a burgeoning trend: targeting disabled employees for layoff. The case in Maryland charges a land surveying firm with laying off two longtime workers while retaining people with less seniority and less experience. The layoffs occurred after the company had required employees to fill out a questionnaire delving into this medical conditions and the medications they took. The two laid off individuals had hypertension and diabetes. According to the complaint, they were able to perform their duties without an accommodation.
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, an employer may not discriminate against an employee with a disability, or who is regarded as having a disability, or who has a record of a disability, so long as the person can do the essential functions of the job with or without a reasonable accommodation. In many cases the dispute centers on the identification of what are the truly essential functions of the job, in others whether the accommodation is reasonable. But here, the laid off workers were able to do their jobs. In a case filed in Atlanta by the EEOC, a worker who had been managing to do her job as a cashier at Rite Aid with arthritis by using a small stool at the cash register. After seven years of this accommodation, a new manager removed the stool because he “did not like the idea” of her using the school.
Discrimination against disabled employees probably stems from several psychological and financial sources. Some people just do not like people who are different, or have squeamishness about someone with a disease or disfigurement. Some employers calculate the cost of insurance premiums by someone with a medical condition, or assume that the person will take off more time than others. The law attempts to deal with this range of motivations by making it illegal to discriminate against someone who has a disability, has a record of a disability (such as cancer in remission), or is regarded as having a disability (such as where the person is rumored to have AIDS).
Although the EEOC’s complaint does not highlight this, the action of the Maryland firm requiring an questionnaire about health conditions and medications is a major no-no. Employers are allowed to ask if someone can perform the essential functions of the job with or without a reasonable accommodation. After hiring the person, the employer can explore the accommodations needed in more detail. But here, the EEOC alleges that employees who are doing their jobs without problem are subjected to an intrusive questionnaire, which was then used to weed them out. Neither of these actions passes muster under the ADA.
Posted by marykeating on September 21, 2010 under Age discrimination, Economic situation |
The New York Times reported the agony of many older workers who are struggling through the recession and massive layoffs. They fear that, though they planned to work until 65 or longer, they may actually never find another job.
With the economy adding fewer jobs than were shed in the last recession, and unemployment among young people also high, these fears are realistic. The article touches on the social impact on our culture as a whole if people too young to collect social security join the ranks of the homeless. Ironically, the stereotypical attitudes that often act against older applicants may become reality: they are not conversant with the latest business software, if they’ve been out of work for years. After a point, it’s no longer age discrimination, it’s simply hiring the most qualified workers.
Posted by marykeating on September 19, 2010 under Court news |
The President is becoming frustrated with the Senate’s glacial pace in confirming his judicial nominees. When his term began, the Fourth Circuit was understaffed by five; there are now two openings. Judge Albert Diaz has been waiting for action on his nomination longer than anyone else. Apparently there is no organized opposition, just a very slow pace for the votes. Judge Diaz earned unanimous votes from the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Posted by marykeating on September 16, 2010 under Wage and hour issues |
Yesterday a bill was introduced in both houses of Congress to crack down on worker misclassification.
The law is called the “Fair Playing Field Act of 2010,” and is endorsed by the President. The press release from Senator Kerry’s office is playing the bill up as closing a tax loophole. Indeed, businesses paying their workers appropriately have a competitive disadvantage when other companies are refusing to pay FICA tax, unemployment tax, workers compensation premiums, and fringe benefits. The other side of the coin is that employees have those very protections if they are injured or become unemployed. Self-employed individuals (people classified as independent contractors) are also liable to pay the employer’s half of the FICA tax, called self-employment tax.
The tax loophole sought to be closed gave employers a break on penalties if they were caught misclassifying employees. It also will require more regulations to clarify the line between employee and independent contractor, which is not always clear. Maryland similarly has an initiative aimed specifically at several industries, such as lawn care and construction, that have been found to have a high proportion of companies skirting the law.
Posted by marykeating on September 15, 2010 under Sex-based discrimination |
The Department of Labor filed an administrative complaint today against Tyson Fresh Meats, a subsidiary of Tyson Foods. The complaint alleges that Tyson has systematically refused to hire female applicants in a plant in Illinois. The Department seeks back wages and other relief, including hiring, for 750 women alleged to have been rejected only because of Tyson’s illegal practices.
To attract this kind of Labor Department charge is even more drastic than being a defendant to an EEOC complaint. While both seek wide-ranging relief and damages, the Department of Labor is also in charge of enforcing a long-standing executive order mandating that federal contractors abide by federal anti-discrimination laws. This executive order, 11246, dating from 1965, drove the requirement of affirmative action reporting by federal contractors in the 1970s and 1980s.
By running afoul of the Department of Labor’s investigation, Tysons faces debarment, or a period during which it will not be permitted to contract with the federal government. For many companies, losing the federal government’s business is a death knell. Tyson’s is reported by Labor to be the largest supplier of premium beef and pork, and can survive without the government. But any debarment will surely be a blow to profits, and the publicity surrounding the discrimination charge may attract others.
Posted by marykeating on September 6, 2010 under Economic situation |
For better or worse, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the unemployment picture looks much the same as last year this time. A large amount of temporary census workers have been laid off, as expected. In addition, more people are classified as “discouraged workers,” meaning people who are not looking for work because they don’t think there are jobs open to them. More people are employed part-time for economic reasons, meaning they would work more if the hours were offered.
Health care employment is up, and manufacturing is down. The report refrains from drawing conclusions, but seems to see no significant trends.
Posted by marykeating on September 1, 2010 under Interesting cases, Sex-based discrimination |
Wal-Mart has appealed to the Supreme Court the Ninth Circuit’s green light for the massive class action suit. As reported here earlier, the class action could lead to disposition of 1.5 million claims by women blocked from promotional opportunities. The petition for review asks the Supreme Court to disallow a class action where each worker’s damages have to be separately calculated, and also complained of the sheer mass of the case. The petition makes two main arguments. One is based on the proper interpretation of the federal rule governing class actions. The other argument contends that the plaintiffs’ proof is eased by this method, and that trying a case in this way deprives WalMart of the right to trial by jury.
Lyle Denniston of Scotusblog predicts that the petition will be decided this coming term. If it is granted, then the parties will brief the issues, which are historic. There may not be enough time to conclude the case by the end of the coming term.
One easy prediction: the fact that there are now three women on the Supreme Court will be mentioned frequently (did you read it here first?)
