American Staffing Association (04/30/12) Ed Lenz

The U.S. Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have issued formal requests for comment on certain employer requirements under the Affordable Care Act. In this round of requests, the government is asking for input on several issues, including the process for verifying an individual’s eligibility for tax credits to purchase insurance coverage through state-based health insurance exchanges, and employers’ obligation to provide an annual report to the IRS on the employees covered under their health plans and the details of such coverage—including the number of full-time employees, the length of any waiting periods, and whether the employer’s plan provides “minimum value.” Comments are due June 11. ASA and its business allies in the Employers for Flexibility in Health Care coalition will be submitting comments in response to the requests.

Greenville News (South Carolina) (04/30/12)

South Carolina lawmakers are moving to prevent substitute teachers from collecting unemployment benefits for being out during school breaks, such as summer recess. Though South Carolina teachers, including substitutes, are already forbidden by law from collecting unemployment when they are not working during holiday, spring, or summer breaks, the law refers to teachers employed by school systems, and some staffing companies are now employing hundreds of substitute teachers, making the teachers exempt from the unemployment law.

Jim McIntire, a vice president for Kelly Services Inc., which provides 250-300 substitutes each day in several South Carolina school districts, says the issue of whether such teachers can collect unemployment has surfaced in other states where the company employs the teachers. “That is why we are supporting this legislation in South Carolina,” McIntire says. “We are trying to take steps so it doesn’t become a big problem. There are some states where it is a significant problem for us.” Kelly Services coordinates the use of substitutes with school districts that use its services, significantly increasing the percentage of teaching posts that are filled each day to about 98%.

Riverside Press-Enterprise (California) (04/28/12) Jack Katzanek

The number of overtime lawsuits brought in federal court last year was 32% higher than in 2008. According to research by the law firm Seyfarth Shaw, 7,006 lawsuits, including many class actions, were filed in 2011, almost four times as many as were filed in 2000. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Labor recovered $225 million from employers in back wages in fiscal 2011, up 28% from the previous year.

Worker advocates and other analysts say that these claims are being filed because companies are striving to get the same volume of work done despite having laid off 9 million workers due to the recession. “When there are increased pressures on employers to keep down labor costs in a down economy, and fewer employment options for employees, it isn’t surprising that legal and ethical problems with regard to compensation have increased,” says Jeffery Smith, a professor of ethics at the University of Redlands School of Business. Smith says that workers are frequently misclassified and listed as not legally entitled to overtime.

Matthew Bartosiak, senior consultant for the human resources consulting firm Employers Group, says “many employers unfortunately still wrongly classify workers because they don’t understand the laws. Most think exemption is a choice, and they think employees want to be exempt because they see it as a status symbol.”

Business Management Daily (04/26/12) Mindy Chapman

When disabled workers take leave under the Americans With Disabilities Act, their ability to call in absent is not open-ended. If regular attendance is an essential component of the job, then calling in absent is not a “reasonable” accommodation, the Ninth Circuit Court found in Samper v. Providence St. Vincent Med. Ctr. To protect your company from ADA lawsuits, determine whether physically showing up is essential, then make this clear in the job description.

Lexology (04/19/12) Joseph Wood III

In EEOC v. Dillard’s, a federal district court in California ruled that a policy requiring employees to disclose the reasons for health-related absences violates the Americans With Disabilities Act. The court affirmed the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s determination that such policies lead to intrusive questions that could uncover information about actual or perceived disabilities and ruled that employers need not know about the nature of the medical condition in order to verify legitimate medical absences. Employers should alter such policies so that doctor’s notes only require the dates the employee was absent for health issues, and employers should not question employees about the reason for the absence even when such questions are asked out of care.

NPR Online (04/29/12) Tom Dreisbach; Rachel Martin

Service members returning to civilian life may find it difficult to secure a civilian job, especially when they belong to the National Guard and could be called to active duty, but experts say that it can be difficult to prove whether a veteran’s service has cost him or her jobs or promotions. Michael Haynie, executive director of Syracuse University’s Institute for Veterans and Military Families, says the Uniformed Service Employment and Reemployment Rights Act puts the burden of proving discrimination on the individual, and the burden is high because “very often the discrimination is not necessarily explicit.” Kenan Torrans of the U.S. Department of Labor Veterans’ Employment and Training Service says complaints of discrimination are on the rise as more service members return to civilian life, and he says most disputes stem from a misunderstanding of the law. U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), chair of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, has introduced legislation to beef up laws to prevent labor discrimination against veterans.