KMK Law Management Rights Blog

This weekend Cam Newton, the quarterback for Auburn University, won the Heisman Trophy.  For those of you who do not follow college football, the Heisman is an award given to the most outstanding player in collegiate football each year.  If you do follow college football, you are probably aware that this year’s award carries with it a scandal based on claims that Newton's father tried to get another college to pay $180,000 for his son to play for them.  Although it has suggested that its investigation is on-going, the NCAA so far has found no evidence that Cam Newton or Auburn knew about his father’s scheme.  Cam Newton has denied any wrongdoing, although he does have a past history of brushes with the law.  Not surprisingly, this situation generated a lot of discussion about whether Cam Newton is worthy of the award. 

This week the Sixth Circuit issued an opinion in Jakubowski v. The Christ Hosp., Inc. affirming a district court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of the employer.  The plaintiff, Dr. Martin Jakubowski, was diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome, a condition that severely impeded his ability to communicate with patients and co-workers. 

The holidays are here again and they represent a minefield for employers.  It seems that every year the period of time from mid-November through the end of the year is guaranteed to generate employment litigation. 

Consider this scenario – a male manager tells his female subordinate that he is requiring her to allow a third party to take nude pictures of her but if she prefers, she can instead elect to be groped by a total stranger.  This is part of her job and if she refuses she could be terminated or face other adverse action, e.g. discipline or demotion.  That manager should be fired immediately, you say?  How about this scenario: a male manager tells his female subordinate that he is requiring her to take a commercial airline flight to visit a customer.  That one happens every day and could hardly be objectionable, or could it?

It’s been a while since I have posted a Labor Law Movie Review and watching 9 to 5 is not something that will make me jump at the chance to do these more regularly.  A little too over the top campy for my tastes, but it does provide some interesting historical perspective.

Today, the Sixth Circuit issued a decision in Bates v. Dura Automotive Systems, Inc. that may appear to be of interest to employers who have or want to implement drug testing programs.  Unfortunately, the decision is of limited use in predicting future outcomes because, among other things, it is extremely narrow and was decided without reference to the ADAAA, having arisen before the amendments took effect.  Regardless, it is worth a look as it will be touted as a win for employers and some may be misled about its significance.

I know I just posted about the NFL but they keep doing things that are instructive to those of us with an interest in employment law.  During last week’s games, an unusual number of players were injured by blows to the head.  As a result, some fines were levied, including one to a Steelers player named James Harrison.

I ran across an article in the USA Today entitled “What did Brett Favre do wrong? Legal experts uncertain.”  For those of you who don’t follow football, Favre allegedly made advances toward a female employee of the New York Jets football team when he was a member of the Jets.  The advances included messages on Myspace, voice messages and x-rated photos allegedly e-mailed or texted by Favre.  Bearing in mind that I have no information apart from what has been reported in the media, this situation does not really seem that mysterious to me.

According to the latest news, jobs have dropped by another 95,000 in the past month and unemployment continues to hover at 9.6%.  In short, things do not appear to be improving and it is likely that we will continue to see workforce reductions until they do.

I read an interesting post this week at the HR Observations blog that addressed what to do when the victim of alleged harassment is a human resources employee.  In considering how to craft a harassment policy that would provide a solution for the HR/victim scenario, the suggestions centered on involving an outside investigator in the process.  Possible outsiders included: a member of the Board of Directors; an outside employment attorney; or an HR consultant.