|Nov. 1, 2017 | www.fisherphillips.com|
Is honesty really the best policy at the workplace? Some employers believe that a few little white lies might help them avoid uncomfortable situations and confrontations. It’s common for some to spare an employee’s feelings during performance reviews for fear of upsetting the employee or being accused of treating them differently from others. Many employers also believe it’s a good policy to avoid candor when letting an employee go for performance deficiency reasons, opting instead to tell some story about a work slowdown or mysterious economic circumstances.
Of all the accommodations considered reasonable under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), perhaps the most frustrating is when an employee requests additional time off after their 12 weeks of Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave ends. This is particularly true since the ADA, unlike the FMLA, provides no statutory or regulatory parameters indicating the amount of additional leave you must provide. However, a federal appeals court has just handed employers a milestone victory in one such legal battle that might ease the frustration levels for some.
After more than ten years of protracted litigation brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), including a stop at the U.S. Supreme Court, an Iowa federal district court recently upheld an award of nearly $2 million in attorneys’ fees in favor of CRST Van Expedited. The court criticized the EEOC’s practice of presenting a moving target while prosecuting a Title VII class action, holding that most of the sexual harassment claims brought on behalf of nearly 78 claimants were “frivolous, groundless, or unreasonable.” What can employers learn from this decision?