Understanding Employment Law

Let's be real: If you're in HR, you've probably misinterpreted the law at some point and found yourself looking back a few years later with a facial expression that looked something like: 😰 😅 🤮 Here are just a few examples of incorrect legal assumptions I've heard over the years from HR professionals: - You cannot legally terminate an underperforming employee if they've disclosed a medical issue — regardless of ongoing performance issues, reasonable accommodations, etc - You're not legally required to conduct an employee investigation unless an employee files a formal complaint - Employers are responsible for assigning legally required trainings like Harassment Prevention; whether or not the employee actually takes that training, however, is on them Okay, fine. 1 or 2 of these may have been things I was personally told by an HR manager early on in my career. Whoops. And listen, I get it. This stuff is hard. Worse yet when you're thrown into a new responsibility with little to no formal training. I mean, HR professionals quite literally are not lawyers. We do not have formal law degrees. Who thought it would be a good idea to make us responsible for a bunch of legally nuanced scopes of responsibility without any formal training? Especially when the laws keep changing on us every few years and with distinctions by state. But the fact is, we *are* responsible for a bunch of legally nuanced stuff. And it's our job to make sure we get it right — both for the wellbeing of our employees, and for the long-term success of the company itself. So what can you do if you've been thrown into the deep end and feel like you're struggling to keep up with the constant influx of changing legal requirements? 1. Find trusted resources that will keep you posted on the latest in compliance and employment-related legal requirements. I like HR Brew, and of course, Ethena's newsletters. (Link below.) 2. Pressure test your knowledge with multiple sources. People make mistakes. So don't just take one person's word as truth. Look at multiple sources of data. Sign up for webinars, talk to lawyers, download legal resources, etc. (I'll share a few resources below.) 3. Lean on People communities you can reach out to for help. If you've got a legal question, I can promise you: Many other People leaders have stumbled upon this same question themselves. Having a People community you can reach out to for resources, advice, and more is a must. I've personally found a ton of value in the TroopHR community. Resources you might find helpful: - How to terminate an employee (including scripts): https://lnkd.in/eBVKk8Js - Employee investigation checklist: https://lnkd.in/e2APi_WE - Reasonable accommodation templates: https://lnkd.in/egv_2x7m For our full list of legal resources, check out our resources page here: https://lnkd.in/e9_vj7H2 Be honest: Which areas of HR do you see people get wrong the most often? Which areas are the trickiest?

You’ve documented the complaint. You’ve run the investigation. And yes, you’ve made the final call. But here’s the part most HR pros skip: ✳️ They forget to close the loop. Let’s back up for a second. When it comes to employee complaints, there’s no one-size-fits-all process. Sometimes it’s a coaching conversation. Other times it’s a formal investigation that leads to someone’s exit. That’s why it helps to map it out. Here’s the basic flow: 📌 𝗜𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘁? → Try coaching first → If concerns remain, escalate for investigation 📌 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘁? → Assess for credibility and scope → Plan the investigation → Interview key people and gather documentation After that, HR must decide: ✅ Is there enough evidence? ✅ Does the behavior violate policy? ✅ What’s the appropriate corrective action? But even when it ends in a termination... That’s not the last step. ✅ 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗽. That might include: • Following up with the complainant • Offering team support • Reviewing your policy for gaps 𝙄𝙩’𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙥 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙨𝙚𝙩𝙨 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙖𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩. And it separates reactive HR from thoughtful, strategic HR. What would you add to the process? ♻️ I appreciate 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 repost. 𝗪𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗛𝗥 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀? Visit my profile and join my newsletter for weekly tips to elevate your career! Stephanie Adams, SPHR #Adamshr #Hrprofessionals #humanresources #HR #hrcommunity Adams HR Consulting

🚨 California just moved one step closer to regulating AI in hiring. The Civil Rights Council’s Automated-Decision System (ADS) rules are now at the Office of Administrative Law. If OAL signs off, they could take effect as early as July 1, 2025—and they’ll reshape how we build and deploy AI for recruiting, screening, and promotions. What’s coming: 🔹 ADS = almost any algorithm that helps make an employment decision. 🔹 Bias evidence matters: lack of testing can sink your defense. 🔹 Four-year data-retention rule for inputs, outputs, and model logs. 🔹 Liability extends to vendors acting as an employer’s “agent.” 🔹 Accommodation required for candidates with disabilities. What this matters (from my perspective): Even without a formal “audit mandate,” the safest path is to prove your models are fair, job-related, and well-documented—before the rules land. ⏰ Action item: Start (or strengthen) your bias testing, validation studies, and contract language now. Don't wait for the regulations to be final... or cross your fingers for a Federal ban on enforcement. #AI #Hiring #Compliance #California #ADS Khoa Lam, Jeffery Recker, Bryan Ilg, Sheila Leunig, Patrick Sullivan, Dinah Rabe, Emily Brown, Navrina Singh

"An employer cannot be liable for what an employee posts online while off-the-clock. Personal time is personal time; it's irrelevant to the workplace." That is an 100% incorrect statement of the law, according to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Okonowsky v. Garland. Linda Okonowsky worked as a staff psychologist in a federal prison. She discovered that a lieutenant with whom she worked operated an Instagram account followed by more than 100 prison employees, which contained overtly sexist (and racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, and transphobic) content. It also contained offensive content about the workplace and horrible content that specifically targeted her, including one about the male staff "gang banging" her. When she complained to the prison's safety manager, he told her that she needed to "toughen up" or "get a sense of humor." It took months of complaints and escalating social-media awfulness before the prison finally took action. In Okonowsky's sexual harassment lawsuit, the 9th Circuit rejected the district court's order that had dismissed her claim because the Instagram posts happened outside of the physical workplace. "We … reject the notion that only conduct that occurs inside the physical workplace can be actionable, especially in light of the ubiquity of social media and the ready use of it to harass and bully both inside and outside of the physical workplace." If you're an employer deciding what you should do about harassing or bullying social media posts made outside of your physical workplace or off-hours, you should reject that notion, too. If you don't, and act like the prison did in this case, you are helping create a hostile work environment and helping create a Title VII cause of action.

It’s a controversial decision. But we finally have an answer. The Supreme Court has sided with Starbucks in a battle with the National Labor Relations Board. The case involved Starbucks workers in Tennessee who were fired after trying to unionize their store. So what does this mean for you? The Supreme Court’s ruling is a step towards leveling the playing field, offering a clearer framework for businesses and employees alike. If you’re an employer or HR professional, here’s how we recommend navigating this new workplace landscape: ⚬ Regularly review workplace policies to ensure they’re in line with labor laws.  ⚬ Enhance documentation practices for disciplinary actions to demonstrate they’re non-discriminatory.  ⚬ Implement training sessions on labor rights for both management and staff.  ⚬ Consult with legal experts to understand how this ruling impacts future NLRB litigation.  MOST IMPORTANTLY:  ⚬ Create a workplace culture that prioritizes employee concerns, open communication, and trust. https://shrm.co/9qnfwr #SHRM #HR #HumanResources #Starbucks #Union

An oh-so-rare Supreme Court ruling, unanimous despite its heavily political nature. That means Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan actually agreed on something for you legal nerds who follow such things, and you know how uncommon that is - it's been more than a decade since a unanimous decision on a Title VII case. Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services* (2024) clearly and convincingly rejected the idea that members of majority groups must meet a higher bar to prove workplace discrimination. The Court reaffirmed that Title VII protects all employees. This decision matters for every workplace: 1) Bias doesn’t get a free pass just because it’s directed at someone in a majority group 2) “Reverse” is a political term, not a legal one 3) Discrimination is defined by behavior, not by who is being harmed and most importantly 4) Employers need consistent, fair processes for handling discrimination claims across all identities Policies that treat some complaints more seriously than others based on perceived social context are red flags for litigation risk. Fair is fair. Equal protection means equal protection. Discrimination is discrimination. If you are in an environment that is discriminating against you because you identify with one or more underrepresented communities, it is not enough to collect evidence that you were discriminated against. You should also collect evidence that others in different categories were treated differently. For example, if you were 30 minutes late to work because of your disability, someone else was 30 minutes late because of day care, and a third person was 30 minutes late due to traffic, all three should be treated exactly the same. The Supreme Court just said the quiet part out loud. Alt: Reverse discrimination does not exist. The only thing that is discrimination is discrimination. #AccessibilityTruthTuesday #EqualProtection #Accessibility #Inclusion #Disability #WorkplaceDiscrimination #SupremeCourtRuling #Discrimination #AntiDiscriminationLaw

Last week, a tech employee messaged me in tears. Her company was trying to force her out right before her $380,000 in stock options vested. Their tactics? Suddenly 'discovering' performance issues after 3 years of stellar reviews. Here's how we protected her equity: First thing we did: 1. Documented everything. •Screenshot every positive review •Saved every performance metric •Archived every congratulatory email •Backed up every team recognition 2. Built a paper trail. We responded to every new "performance concern" in writing: "To confirm our discussion about [issue] today, I've consistently exceeded targets as shown in [specific metrics]..." 3. Identified the pattern. The timing wasn't coincidental: •"Issues" appeared 90 days before vesting •Previously undocumented concerns •Sudden increase in scrutiny •Rush to put her on a performance plan The result? When we presented this evidence showing clear targeting before vesting, they backed off. She got her shares. Every. Single. One. Know Your Legal Protections: Employees have legal protections against terminations designed to prevent stock vesting, though laws vary by state: 1. California: Treats equity as wages, making it illegal to fire employees solely to prevent vesting. 2. Other States: Many uphold good faith employment practices, preventing firings designed to avoid payouts. 3. State courts have awarded damages when terminations were in bad faith. Key lesson: The moment performance issues arise near vesting dates, start documenting. Your equity is a legally protected right, not a corporate favor. Remember: Companies count on you not knowing your rights or being too scared to fight back. Don't let them win. Follow for more corporate tactics exposed and how to protect yourself. #EmploymentLaw #StockOptions #WorkplaceRights Disclaimer: This information is for educational purposes only and does not replace professional legal advice. It does not establish an attorney-client relationship.

Does your business want to promote #DEI legally? I've got 11 tips straight from EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas. Last year, on an episode of Cozen O'Connor's Employment Law Now podcast, hosted by Michael Schmidt, he asked Ms. Lucas about lawful actions employers can take to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion principles. Ms. Lucas responded with eleven of them. 1️⃣Audit Job Descriptions: Eliminate unnecessary job and degree requirements. 2️⃣Audit Job ads and interview questions: Ensure job ads and interview questions do not include race or sex preferences. The same applies to job descriptions. 3️⃣Standardize Interviews: Adopt uniform questions across similar roles to limit subjective biases. Eliminate questions about "fit," especially if code for a protected class. 4️⃣Formalize Promotions: Replace informal, subjective internal promotions such as "tap-on-the-shoulder" practices with transparent, standardized processes. Consider using opt-out methods to ensure all eligible employees are considered. 5️⃣Inclusive Mentorship and Sponsorship: Provide mentorship and sponsorship programs open to all, rather than creating exclusive groups based on race or sex. 6️⃣Universal Leadership Training: Offer leadership development training for all employees at a particular level without racial or sex restrictions. 7️⃣Support First-Generation Professionals: Instead of aiming to boost social mobility, consider programs directed towards first-generation professionals without regard to any protected class. These initiatives could include additional training, employee resource groups, mentoring programs, and internships. 8️⃣Individualized Training: Deliver training tailored to specific employee needs, avoiding racial or sex stereotypes. 9️⃣Conduct Privileged Audits: Identify and address existing workplace discrimination or harassment rather than targeting broader societal problems. 1️⃣0️⃣Broaden Recruitment Efforts: Expand applicant pools by diversifying recruitment channels, including various colleges and advertising forms and formats (print, radio, electronic). Companies can also remove or lower job requirements (e.g., GPA) across the board to widen the applicant pool. 1️⃣1️⃣Rethink Work Culture: Address excessive workloads to minimize barriers disproportionately impacting women and economically disadvantaged employees. Promote healthier work-life balance for improved retention and mobility. Ms. Lucas's podcast comments are not legally binding. Consult an #employmentlaw attorney for advice. However, they affirm that employers can pursue meaningful DEI efforts if they maintain clear, legally compliant frameworks. Emphasizing equal employment opportunities and making merit-based decisions will help organizations foster a diverse, inclusive, and equitable workplace environment while avoiding potential legal pitfalls. I'll link the podcast episode below (h/t Joshua L. Rogers) #TheEmployerHandbook #humanresources

Key State Employment Law Changes effective July 1, 2025 Alabama ● Paid Parental Leave for public employees: First-time paid leave: 8 weeks for eligible female, 2 weeks for male public employees ● Expiration of Overtime Tax Exemption: Resume withholding state income tax on overtime pay. Alaska ● Minimum Wage increase from $12 to $13/hour. ● Paid Sick Leave Mandate: Employers must provide paid sick leave (1 hour per 30 worked). ● Ban on Captive Audience Meetings California ● Los Angeles County Fair Workweek Ordinance: Applies to retail businesses that have at least 300 employees worldwide. ● LA County's minimum wage increases to $17.87 per hour. ● In LA County’s unincorporated areas, increases $17.81 per hour ● Healthcare minimum wage hikes. (Bumps up to $24 per hour for workers at dialysis clinics/large healthcare systems.) Colorado ● Expansion of the Colorado Privacy Act ● New notice and consent obligations for biometric privacy Connecticut ● Retirement Security Program expansion: Personal care attendants covered; penalties for non-enrollment Georgia ● Subminimum wage ban for disabled workers Idaho ● Ban on Employer-Required Medical Interventions ● Workers’ Compensation: LLC members face criminal liability for not securing coverage Illinois (CHICAGO) ● Minimum wage increase: $16.60/hour standard, $12.62 tipped ● Fair Workweek Ordinance thresholds coverage increase to $32.60/hour and $62,561.90/year ● Paid Leave Payout Expansion: Medium employers (51-100 covered employees) pay out up to 56 hours unused leave at separation ● Updated employment posters Indiana: ● All employers are required to give workers unpaid time off to attend a school attendance conference or meeting for their child. Oregon ● Minimum wage increase: $15.05 statewide, $16.30 Portland metro, $14.05 nonurban ● Job Applications: Ban on requesting age or graduation dates before an interview or offer (effective 9/28/2025) Tennessee ● Antidiscrimination Enforcement agency change ● Consumer Privacy: New privacy law for certain for-profit businesses ● Healthcare non-competes banned: Restrictive covenants for healthcare workers banned Vermont ● Pay Transparency in job ads: Employers with 5+ employees must include wage ranges Virginia ● Non-Compete ban for employees earning <$76,081 or entitled to O/T. Washington, D.C. ● Minimum wage: Increases to $18/hour; $12/hour for tipped employees West Virginia ● Child Labor permit changes Wisconsin ● Return-to-Office Mandate for State agencies Wyoming ● Non-Compete ban What should HR do to ensure compliance? - Audit payroll - Update leave policies - Revise job postings - Review agreements - Update procedures - Train managers - Replace posters - and of course...communicate changes Hope this helps. I've included the state links in the comments below for further details, or feel free to reach out to me for any assistance. #EmploymentLaw #Compliance #Humanresource #HR #statelaw #Minimumwage #paidleave

NDAs, like most other agreements, generally have a term. 1-2 years tends to be typical. I don't have any problem with that. But if that's the only time period mentioned, that's often a #ContractTrap. There are 2 key time periods for an NDA (or any other agreement with confidentiality obligatoins). There's the disclosing period (which is often defined as the "Term" of the NDA), which identifies the period over which covered information shared would be entitled to the protections of the NDA. And there's a confidentiality period (which is often missing), which identifies the period for which such covered information must be kept confidential. Why is a separate confidentiality period important? Because without it, confidentiality obligations will expire simultaneously with the term. So if you have an NDA with a 2 year term, and exchange confidential information throughout the term, some of that information will only be protected for a day. Sure, you could build in some processes to make sure that you would amend and extend that NDA if you were in that situation. But it's far simpler and less error prone to define a separate confidentiality period at the outset. Depending on your NDA, it could be as simple as: "The term of this Agreement shall be 2 years (the "Term"). The obligations of [Sections specifying confidentiality obligation] shall survive for [1] year following conclusion of the Term."