Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
One of the most controversial questions since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) has been whether an employer must reassign an employee who can no longer perform his or her job because of a disability. After years of conflicting decisions and arguments, the answer is now easy ' yes. Virtually all federal courts have agreed with the EEOC that an employer must consider reassigning an employee in such circumstances. However, this raises a number of issues, such as: When should reassignment be considered? What positions must be considered for reassignment? Must an employer modify its seniority rules? And, must the disabled employee compete for the new position?
Although there are legitimate questions about the scope of an employer's reassignment obligation, some points are clear. First, reassignment is available only to employees, not to applicants. However, the EEOC has taken the position that 'probationary' employees may well be entitled to reassignment if they have been performing the job to the employer's satisfaction. Second, an employer does not have to bump any employee from a job in order to create a vacancy. Third, an employer does not have to promote an employee as a reassignment. Some courts have said this means that the employer does not need to promote someone from a part-time position to a full-time position, or from an hourly position to a salaried position. Fourth, an individual must only be reassigned to a job for which s/he is qualified (with an accommodation if necessary).
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.