Act Intending to Increase Warning of Layoffs Introduced.

On June 25, 2009, legislation was introduced in the Senate and the House to amend the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN). The Act entitled the FOREWARN Act would now require employers of 75 employees (rather than 100 under the WARN Act) to warn employees of potential layoffs of 25 or more workers (the […]

Read More

Employee Free Choice Act of 2009

A recent visitor to this blog asked a question about the Employee Free Choice Act of 2009. Dear Mr. Crook: Any updates on the Employee Free Choice Act? Would you be able to comment on how this act may affect public employers? If passed, would it make it nearly impossible for public employers to keep […]

Read More

Supreme Court Rules that City Violated Title VII When It Threw Out Test Results Because of Its Fear of Violating Title VII.

In an opinion issued today entitled Ricci v. DeStefano, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the city of New Haven, Connecticut violated Title VII when it “threw out” promotional examination results after it discovered that the results disproportionately favored non-minority test takers. Although the city had carefully planned the test and hired an organization […]

Read More

United States Supreme Court Rules that to Prove Age Discrimination Age Must Be More than Just a Motivating Factor

On Thursday, June 18, 2009, the United States Supreme Court ruled that in order to prove age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), a person must prove more than that age was a “motivating factor.” Instead, the Court stated in its opinion entitled Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., that […]

Read More

Utah Court of Appeals Affirms Penalty for Fraud in Unemployment Application.

On June 4, 2009, the Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the Department of Workforce Services’ assessment of a penalty against an unemployment benefits recipient who failed to disclose that she worked during weeks in which she received unemployment benefits. In Mugleston v. Department of Workforce Services, the Court ruled that despite the recipients claims that […]

Read More

When is a Sarbanes-Oxley Retaliation Claim Timely?

In Rzepiennik v. Archstone-Smith, Inc., the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal circuit having jurisdiction over Utah, considered the question of when a retaliation claim under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) is considered timely. The employee in the case contended that his employer had retaliated against him when he reported financial irregularities internally by terminating […]

Read More

Utah Employment Selections Procedure Act Amended.

The Utah Employment Selections Procedure Act was amended in the recent special legislative session. The amendment clarifies and expands the times that birthdates, social security numbers, and drivers license numbers can be requested. However, the law continues to restrict the use of this information and continues to require a document retention policy.

Read More

Are Your Background Checks Done Properly?

Many employers use background checks to investigate the background of their employees who have fiduciary obligations, such as money management, driving duties, or have high-profile positions with the company. The Fair Credit Reporting Act applies to any of these background checks performed by a consumer reporting agency for an employer. The act requires that, if […]

Read More