OSHA announced yesterday (http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=19158) that it has temporarily withdrawn from review by the OMB its proposal to restore a column for work-related musculoskeletal disorders on employer injury and illness logs citing the need “to seek greater input from small businesses.”

(more…)

In February 2003, North American Stainless (NAS) received notice that Miriam Regalado had filed an EEOC charge against it. Three weeks later, NAS fired Ms. Regalado’s fiancée, Eric Thompson. Mr. Thompson thereafter brought a Title VII retaliation claim against NAS in federal court in Kentucky. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of NAS on the theory that Title VII did not allow “third party retaliation claims.” That decision was ultimately affirmed by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Earlier today, however, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Sixth Circuit and held 8-0 (the majority opinion was drafted by Scalia, with Kagan not participating) that Mr. Thompson’s suit could proceed even though it was not he who had engaged in protected activity under Title VII. A link to the decision is below. Bottom line — In 2006, the Supreme Court adopted a pretty broad standard for what types of employment actions could be retaliatory under Title VII. The Court has now used some of the rationale from that decision to essentially prohibit “associational retaliation.” (more…)

The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual report on union membership rates came out yesterday and noted the following “highlights” from this year’s data: (more…)

In recognition of OSHA’s decision yesterday not to reconfigure its interpretation of occupational noise standards (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZGWQauQOAQ) (and since we played hooky from the blog during our snow sabbatical), we have an unprecedented “threefer” for you.

(more…)

With a nod to the recently filed whistleblower lawsuit featuring Lane Kiffin, we have a twofer for the HR Song(s) of the Week. 

(more…)

(more…)

This week the United States Department of Labor is hosting a series of Q&A sessions regarding its “Plan/Prevent/Protect” regulatory agenda via webcast.  (Here’s the link to the schedule: http://www.dol.gov/regulations/.)  While all of this may seem wonky (and it is), everyone needs to start paying attention to items like the Office of Labor-Management Standards’ plans to issue a rule to narrow the application of the “advice exemption” of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (i.e., an effort to require more disclosure of employer spending with outside consultants on union avoidance).  As they say, the devil is in the details.