News & Analysis

You can't quit—you're fired!

From: Kentucky Employment Law Letter | 06/01/2013
by Keith Moorman

The Kentucky Court of Appeals recently determined that an employee who resigned was entitled to unemployment benefits because the employer asked her to postpone the effective date of her resignation until after a certain event but then terminated her before the event occurred.

Wake up, people! Sleeping on the job is a legitimate reason for termination

From: Kentucky Employment Law Letter | 06/01/2013
by Amy M. Miller-Mitchell

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky recently dismissed an employee's Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claims, finding his employer offered a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for terminating him. The court also found the employer didn't fail to accommodate the employee, who suffered from diabetes and sleep apnea. Let's take a closer look at what happened in this case.

Lack of additional assignments entitles employee to unemployment benefits

From: Kentucky Employment Law Letter | 06/01/2013
by Brandon W. Gearhart

The Kentucky Court of Appeals recently upheld unemployment benefits for an employee who informed his employer that his main job duties had been eliminated by a contractor. The court found that the employer never contacted the employee to assign him further tasks. As a result, his job loss wasn't his fault.

Short-term employee's disability discrimination claims dismissed

From: Kentucky Employment Law Letter | 06/01/2013
by David Hoskins

The federal district court in Paducah recently dismissed disability discrimination claims filed by an employee who worked at a fast-food restaurant for only three weeks. The court reiterated that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) doesn't allow claims against individual employees, and a complaining employee must have proof of discrimination, not just personal conjecture.

Blatant insubordination disqualifies employee from unemployment benefits

From: Kentucky Employment Law Letter | 06/01/2013
by Catherine Stevens

The Kentucky Court of Appeals recently reiterated that repeated insubordination that leads to an employee's discharge also disqualifies her from receiving unemployment benefits.

Growing prevalence of severe food allergies may trigger ADA accommodations

From: Kentucky Employment Law Letter | 06/01/2013

Late last year, a small private university in Massachusetts entered into a detailed settlement related to accommodating food allergies on campus. The settlement was the first of its type in higher education, but could it have broader implications for employers in general?

9th Circuit ruling shows retaliation claims are pesky

From: Oregon Employment Law Letter | 05/06/2013

When an employee complains about discrimination or harassment and later loses her job, the employer could very likely be targeted with a retaliation claim. The logical connection between the complaint and the discharge is hard to overcome. That's why the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all Oregon employers) recently sent a retaliation claim back to the lower court for trial, even while affirming the dismissal of the sexual harassment complaint that put all the events into motion.

Growing prevalence of severe food allergies may trigger ADA accommodations

From: Oregon Employment Law Letter | 05/06/2013

Late last year, a small private university in Massachusetts entered into a detailed settlement related to accommodating food allergies on campus. The settlement was the first of its type in higher education, but could it have broader implications for employers in general?

Local union officials owe loyalty to organization, not just members

From: Oregon Employment Law Letter | 05/06/2013

Federal labor law bars local union officials from undermining their local in favor of a new organization to sidestep the plans of the parent international union to realign members. That was the recent ruling of the 9th Circuit in reviewing a challenge by local union officials who appealed a trial verdict against them. They claimed they were obligated to look out only for the interests of their rank-and-file members, not for the interests of the union. The court disagreed.

Workplace Trends

From: Oregon Employment Law Letter | 05/06/2013

Survey shows employers shifting healthcare costs. An annual employer survey on healthcare costs shows that employers remain committed to providing active employee healthcare benefits, but they're shifting more of the cost to employees. The survey from consultant Towers Watson and National Business Group on Health found that employers expect average total costs for active employees to reach $12,136 in 2013, up 5.1% from $11,457 in 2012, the lowest cost increase in 15 years. Despite the relatively moderate cost increases of the last few years, employees contribute 42% more for health care than they did five years ago, compared to a 32% increase for employers, according to the survey. The total employee cost share, including premiums and out-of-pocket costs, has climbed from 34% in 2011 to 37% in 2013. In the coming years, more than 80% of survey respondents plan to continue to raise the share of premiums paid by employees, including rethinking their subsidy strategy for dependents.