Posted by marykeating on February 25, 2011 under Workplace privacy | 
Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services has backed off of its policy to demand that applicants and employees returning from leave reveal their facebeook ids and passwords. The American Civil Liberties Union got involved, and sent a letter a month ago to the Secretary of the Department, detailing the unwarranted privacy implications of the policy. An employee returning to work after leave was instructed that the department would need unfettered access to his account for up to two months.
The Washington Post reported that the policy will be suspended for 45 days, pending review. Although its first accounts stated that the policy helped to determine if potential employees were involved in gang activity, a source for the Post said that the facebook screening was unrelated to the gang tie issue.
Posted by marykeating on February 24, 2011 under Economic situation |
The huge economic stimulus spending from the last two years has affected employment positively, according to an economic analysis by the Congressional Budgeting Office. The report notes that the conclusions can’t be tested against how the economy would have done without the stimulus, so the estimates are reported in rather wide ranges.
The report concludes that the unemployment rate reduced by a half percent to more than one percent, and that employment rose by anywhere from 900,000 to 1.9 million people.
The CBO refers to another study that concluded that the stimulus spending had a large positive effect during the spending period (which is over now), and then fell to almost zero. Some of the jobs created were temporary, such as people employed for the big construction projects, and some state and local government employment actually contracted because of the aid to state governments for Medicaid programs.
What the reports cannot capture is whether the spending averted a second great depression, in which case the expenditure was worth it. To people on the receiving end of a new job, even if it turned out to be temporary, the spending was worth it. The future impact of all that borrowing is something we’ll all live with, and maybe dealing with it will create new jobs.
Posted by marykeating on February 20, 2011 under Discrimination in employment, Economic situation |
The EEOC held a meeting on Wednesday to determine if a trend among employers raises civil rights issues. The last year has been especially difficult for unemployed job seekers who report that many companies reject them without a first look because they are unemployed. Several people testified at the meeting that the practice has an adverse impact on women, people with disabilities, older people, and people of color. Representatives for employers did not endorse the practice, but rather thought that the extent of the problem was overblown.
Posted by marykeating on February 18, 2011 under Economic situation |
A new study reports that the labor market is “moving in two directions at the same time.” The latest figures on employment show that the labor force is smaller, and the participation rate is higher. So while unemployment rates have decreased, somehow a large number of workers (about 750,000) have disappeared. The demographic figures predicted an increase of 4.1 million. The missing workers are those who either never entered the job market, that is young people who have yet to obtain their first job, or people who dropped out of the labor market, presumably to reemerge when times are better.
The author of the study points out that these missing workers affect the unemployment rate in a big way; if only half were counted, the unemployment rate overall would be 10.5%, rather than 9%. The telling statistic is this: “Aside from today’s muddled picture, one thing is crystal clear: the U.S. labor market started 2011 with half a million fewer jobs than it had 11 years ago in January 2000.”
The following week, unemployment claims were back up dramatically.
Posted by marykeating on February 17, 2011 under Federal wage and hour law, Pending legislation |
Did you and your sweetie go out to dinner for Valentine’s Day? Your server may be interested in a new law proposed in the house to increase the minimum wage for tipped employees. As of now, the minimum wage for someone like a waiter is $2.13 per hour. The idea is that with tips, the server’s true compensation is generally higher than the minimum wage applicable to other workers. That’s a nice theory, but it may not always work for people who have to participate in tip pools, or whose employers keep their tips (which they are allowed to do, so long as the employee makes at least the generally applicable minimum wage).
Maryland’s Representative Donna Edwards has introduced H.R. 631, the Working for Adequate Gains for Employment in Services Act, to increase the minimum wage for employees living off tips. The acronym is “WAGES.”
The law would increase the minimum wage to $3.75 beginning 90 days after the law is enacted, then after a year increase it to $5.00 per hour, then mandate that in two years it rises to and remains at 70% of the prevailing minimum wage rate.
The bill has been referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Posted by marykeating on February 10, 2011 under Collective rights |
The National Labor Relations Board settled a widely followed case involving an employee who was fired after she complained about her boss on her facebook account. Company policy prohibited employees from disparaging the company and its employees, or even discussing the company on the web. The NLRB got involved, and sued the company.
The company had denied the worker the right to union representation when her supervisor questioned her. That action led to her disparaging remarks. In a settlement agreement, the company has agreed to alter its rules about employees’ rights to discuss their working conditions with each other, and not to deny union representation during meetings with managers. The employee will not be reinstated.
Although this is a unionized employer, the NLRB’s rules apply to workplaces where there has never been a union. Employers are often surprised to learn that they may not make rules forbidding employees to discuss their wages with each other, for example. The right to collective action exists short of a formal collective bargaining organization. Does it extend to “disparagement” on facebook? In this context, probably: the post apparently complained about the working conditions, that is, the employee’s treatment by the supervisor. The conclusion would be stronger if the worker’s facebook friends included coworkers. If the disparaging comments were personal attacks, however, they probably would not qualify as protected discussions.
Posted by marykeating on February 7, 2011 under Discrimination in employment, Economic situation, Pending legislation |
A new law has been proposed in Maryland to restrict the use of a person’s credit history in making employment decisions. Called the Job Applicant Fairness Act, the bill would outlaw using a credit report to deny a job to an applicant, or to discharge an employee. This issue has gotten a lot of attention lately. Since many people have lost their jobs in the last couple of years, their credit ratings may have suffered. A foreclosure or late credit card payments can be directly tied to a layoff, and do not measure a person’s aptitude for a job. In addition, it is widely believed that making employment decisions based on a credit score affects minority candidates more harshly.
The counter argument is that a person with debt pressures is more likely to embezzle. It seems that all people could use more money; a past history of theft is a better indicator of thieving tendencies than someone who has tried and failed to stay current with obligations.
Still, in case there is any validity to the fear that people with poor credit are a danger to client’s money, financial institutions are given some leeway. The bill introduced into the General Assembly gives exceptions in several circumstances, such as when the person is applying for work at a bank whose deposits are insured by a federal agency, someone registered as an investment advisor with the SEC, or if some law requires the employer to consider the applicant’s credit history. In addition, if the person has been given an offer of employment, and the credit report is needed for a reasons other than denying employment, discharging the person, or determining pay or other terms of employment, the employer may request it. Presumably such reasons are related to jobs in which the person has the largest opportunity to embezzle.
Posted by marykeating on February 4, 2011 under Government contractors, Sex-based discrimination |
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been taking on more cases of systematic discrimination, as compared to years when the executive branch was run by the Republican party. The Department of Labor is making waves, too. That Department enforces not just wage and hour laws, but also the affirmative action executive order put into place by President Lyndon Johnson. That order requires businesses doing a certain amount of business with the federal government to refrain from discrimination, to make efforts to improve diversity, and to report on their progress.
The DOL conducted a compliance review, and discovered a problem with the Green Bay Dressed Beef company, which supplies meat for school lunch programs and the military. The company was systematically rejecting women from general laborer positions. It will now pay $1.65 million to 970 women who applied for those jobs, and make job offers to 248 of them, as openings occur.
As the Secretary of the Department, Hilda L. Solis, stated, “There is no such thing as a ‘man’s job.’” The enforcement agencies are especially important in these kinds of case. It is not usually possible for an individual rejected for a job opening to establish that the reason was her gender. Unless the interviewer says something revealing, these cases require either a clearcut pattern, or a whistleblower.
Posted by marykeating on February 1, 2011 under Court news, Sex-based discrimination |
Don’t you just love it when social science corroborates one of your hunches? A new study theorized that male judges with daughters might have more progressive views on gender issues such as discrimination and harassment. It investigated outcomes of cases in which male federal appeals court judges voted. The study concluded that “judges with daughters consistently vote in a more liberal fashion on gender issues than judges without daughters. This effect is particularly strong among Republican appointed judges . . . .”
