I have a question regarding the 1,000-hour vesting/participation requirement related to disability: Employee A works 400 hours as an active (regular) employee. At that point, the employee gets a temporary disability (because of nonwork related activities) and no longer performs work, but is not terminated and remains an employee. In this case, does the 1,000-hour rule get waived since there is a disability? Or does it stay in place since there was no termination event? Thanks for any help/insight.
—Counting the Hours, assistant controller, construction trades, Rancho Dominguez
Employees cannot use California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act to dictate who they will and won’t work with.
Employers, it’s OK to have performance standards.
A transfer to a vacant position is a reasonable accommodation that an employer must consider when engaging a disabled employee in the interactive process.Read More
Don’t take the easy way out with your employees when they ask for accommodations for a disability, religion, or other protected reason. Even if you are legally right (and the odds are good that you won’t be), you will leave the employee feeling offended and upset.
Test randomly and test for cause. There is no need to regulate employees’ off-duty lives by requiring abstinence.Read More
Since Congress expanded the definition of 'disability' in 2009, conventional wisdom has said that most medical conditions will qualify for protection under the ADA. This case sets the bounds of the exception.Read More
If you legitimately cannot make an accommodation that meets the employee’s limitations, then the employee is not “qualified” under the ADA, and therefore unprotected by that law.Read More
Don't take appearance into account when making employment decisions. Hiring and firing should be image-blind, performance-only decisions.Read More
As a court recently pointed out, regular attendance is important in any job. Important, however, does not always equate to essential.Read More