Morristown New Jersey Employment Law Blog

It has been over 50 years since the passage of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but some companies are still running into trouble. Employers are finding themselves liable for discrimination when they treat men and women differently in promotion decisions. Employers can limit their liability for discrimination by adopting objective standards that apply equally to each gender.

A couple of lawsuits highlighted recently by the Society for Human Resource Management give concrete examples of this problem. Both occurred at vehicle dealerships in another state and both were taken up by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

In 2017, employee turnover within the restaurant industry was 73 percent. At the Hot Chicken Takeover chain in Columbus, Ohio, that rate is only 39 percent. The difference could be that Hot Chicken Takeover earns employees' loyalty by giving people with complicated work histories or criminal records a real chance at getting a job. The chain is part of the fair chance hiring movement.

In addition to asking about traditional hiring criteria like work history, Hot Chicken Takeover's fair chance hiring process includes questions meant to gauge the applicant's work readiness and culture fit. Once a new person is hired, Hot Chicken Takeover offers a variety of benefits meant to help people thrive. In addition to the professional development and transit benefits many employers offer, the company provides interest-free cash advances, flexible scheduling, free meals and even counseling.

The state of Massachusetts has just passed a bill that would require companies to provide compensation to former employees if they decide to enforce noncompete agreements. The compensation -- either half the employee's salary or "mutually agreed-upon consideration" -- would be required for up to a year after the employee leaves the company.

This is referred to as "garden leave," after a British colloquialism for being paid to tend to one's garden.

At one time or another, we've all been subjected to a dull, seemingly pointless anti-sexual harassment training. Maybe the moderator simply read every word of the slides aloud. Maybe the information was so obvious that it felt like a waste of everybody's time. Maybe what was obvious was that HR had a compliance goal to meet.

When employee trainings are boring, unenlightening or designed merely to limit liability, the entire process can be worse than ineffective. It can actually be counterproductive. If your anti-sexual harassment trainings have had lackluster results, consider a few tips to make them more useful and engaging: