Delaware Employment Law Blog

Twitter in the courtroom has caused a lot of controversy. Former Pennsylvania legislator, Vince Fumo, is saying it caused more than that. He’s asked the judge who presided over his criminal trial, which ended in a multiple-count conviction, to overturn the jury’s findings based, in part, on a juror’s postings on Twitter and Facebook during the trial. Fumo requested a new trial, alleging juror bias based on their knowledge of information not in evidence but learned during the case through various media sources, reports Philly.com.

What is the best leadership blog? The Remarkable Leadership Blog is set to answer that question.  It's narrowed it down to 10 of the "World's Best Leadership Blogs."  All 10 blogs are listed below but you'll want to go to the original list to cast your vote (and register to win some great prizes, too).

Leading Blog by Michael McKinney

Great Leadership by Dan McCarthy

Seth Godin’s Blog by Seth Godin

Jon Gordon’s Blog by Jon Gordon

Leadership is a Verb by John Bishop

All Things Workplace by Steve Roesler

Work Matters by Bob Sutton

Leader Talk by Mountain State University

Next Level Blog by Scott Eblin

Leadership At Work by John Baldoni

And if 10 isn't enough to satisfy your need to read about leadership, you might want to check out our list of 100 of the Leading Blogs on Leadership.

Privacy settings in Facebook have been the topic of several posts. Part of the problem has been that users have only one choice--you can accept a friend request. . . or not.  If your college roommate sends you a friend request, you are likely to accept it.  You've got nothing to hide, right?  But then you get a friend request from your boss. Or your former professor.  Or your mom.  It's likely that there just may be things on your Facebook page that should never be seen by any of these individuals.  Facebook is set to change this. 

According to the NYT blog, Bits, Facebook plans to overhaul its privacy controls so that users can choose to share only parts of their profiles with designated "friends."  Like Twitter, Facebook's new privacy settings would allow users to share updates only with those they designate or with the public at large.  The settings themselves wouldn't change. But users will be able to apply different settings for different users. 

This will be a major improvement for users who want to separate their personal and professional lives and even subdivide different aspects of their personal lives.  Users can set up feeds for "family," "poker buddies," and "parents of Johnny's friends."  The pictures you post following Friday night's card game won't make its way to your brother-in-law or to your kid's friends' parents. And you can dish about the dress Aunt Moira wore to Suzie's wedding last month without losing credibility with your poker friends.

And, in the employment world, it means that you can post about how bored you are at work without worrying that your boss (whose Friend request you felt compelled to accept), will see it.

Although Facebook hasn't announced when its new privacy settings will be available for all users--currently the settings are being beta tested by 40,000 users.

If you're wondering what could be so bad about sharing all updates with all of your Facebook friends, you should take a look at these previous posts:

Job applicants required to submit Facebook passwords for background checks

More Stories from the Facebook Frontier

Ethical Implications of "Friend-ing" a Witness on Facebook

MySpace Post Results in Termination of Nursing Student

Delaware has the 17th highest rate of adult obesity in the country, with more than one in four adults classified as obese, according to a new report by the Trust for America’s Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Employers bear many of the indirect costs of this obesity rate, including higher disability costs, more sick days, and increased workers’ compensation claims. The report indicated that Delaware’s obesity rate increased significantly in the past three years—a sign that current health and wellness policies aren’t cutting it.

So what can Delaware employers do? The study highlights three steps employers can take to promote healthier lifestyles:

· Provide workplace wellness programs and preventative care benefits

· Give employees a chance to take breaks for exercise during the work-day

· Offer coverage for wellness services such as nutrition counseling and weight management programs

Some companies have already rolled out in-house yoga classes, discounted gym memberships, and free massages for stress reduction. How those perks will weather the economic downturn is an open question. Other options? Employers can offer healthier food choices at company meetings and events, and improve selections at the office cafeteria.

F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies Are Failing in America 2009, was released on July 1, 2009.  For a list of other blogs covering wellness and work-life balance, see our blogroll, including the 50 Best Blogs on Wellness, Women's Interests, and Work-Life Balance

*This guest post is by Summer Associate Christen Martosella. Christen will be entering her second year of law school at NYU in the Fall but, until then, she's busy making a great impression at YCS&T.  Thanks, Christen!

Delaware's hourly wage increase is effective July 24, 2009, and the new hourly wage $7.25/hour.  Additionally, the federal minimum wage is set to increase to $7.25 on July 24, 2009. 22 other states will also increase the minimum wage for employers subject to state wage and hour laws. The majority of these increases take effect on July 24, 2009, but three states (KY, IL, NV) raised their minimum wage effective July 1, 2009.  

Employers-- make sure that starting July 24, 2009, you properly display a copy of Delaware's most current minimum-wage poster in a conspicuous location in your workplace.

[via Legal Antics]

Marco. . .

. . . Polo

Adria B. Martinelli will present Pregnancy Discrimination Claims Flood EEOC: How to Counter New and Aggressive Enforcement on July 23, 2009.

Pregnancy discrimination lawsuits are on the rise and the courts are ruling against employers:

• In the May 2009 AT&T v. Hulteen case, the court ruled that employees who took pregnancy leave before the effective date of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act should be eligible for the same retirement benefits as those who took leave after the law was enacted.
• The Seventh Circuit Court recently recognized the applicability of the PDA to the "potential pregnancy" after an employee claimed she lost her job because she had taken time off for fertility treatment.
• And now that the new ADA Amendments Act has gone into effect, the interplay between the ADA, PDA, and the recently-revised FMLA has further complicated compliance issues for employers.

Learn how to make sense of the overlapping complexities of the PDA, FMLA, and the ADA, and how to accommodate pregnant employees without risking discrimination claims, as well as these other critical and timely topics:

• Key rulings made recently against employers regarding pregnancy discrimination claims, including the U.S. Supreme Court's
  interpretation of the PDA in AT&T v. Hulteen
• How do you know when employees are protected under the PDA? (Hint, they’re not always pregnant.)
• How the new ADA Amendments Act comes into play
• New discrimination risks employers need to consider when training supervisors and managers
• EEOC guidance on family rights discrimination
• Practical advice for day-to-day issues involved with managing pregnant employees
• The kind of accommodations that should and should NOT be made for pregnant workers

Register for this employment law seminar at HR Hero.com

Potential employees will no longer be asked to submit their Facebook and MySpace passwords as part of a "background check," said a spokeswoman for Bozeman, MT. This about-face on its hiring policy came less than a week after news of the new policy ignited a firestorm of criticism.  The town initially defended its position--claiming that it had a duty to be as thorough as possible in investigating potential job applicants. As one may well imagine, the policy wasn't very popular.  (In fact, one poll reported that 98% of residents felt it was an invasion of privacy).

Without restating the obvious, this policy had a lot of serious problems. There's the possibility that the request would have constituted a violation of privacy under the First, Fourth, and Fifteenth Amendments--remember,this is a government employer. 

But the more immediate issue is the limitations this policy would impose on the potential applicant pool. Candidates who value personal privacy and who have a Facebook, MySpace, or similar account, likely wouldn't apply.  This means that that they would likely exclude almost all Gen Y and most Gen X candidates because this segment of the population places privacy at a premium and values their online networks.

And who would they get as applicants? Well, only individuals over 32, in the first instance.  And, of those, only individuals who would either lie and say they didn't have any online profile or individuals who have a "I-do-what-I'm-told-regardless" mentality--the same type of mentality that enabled Hitler to become the leader of an entire nation. And,don't forget that, by turning over their password to their Facebook account, the individual would be in violation of Facebook's terms of service--so you'd end up with a bunch of rule-breakers. Not to mention that turning over a personal password for anything to anyone is just a bad idea indicative of someone with poor judgment (who's to say that some rogue HR employee wouldn't commit some heinous act like blocking out the original owner or changing or deleting the individual's profile--Identity Theft 101 says this is a preventable problem).  Oh, and maybe some individuals who are just so desperate for employment of any kind that they'd be willing to forgo their personal autonomy--a characteristic certain to last for a very brief period, especially once employment had been secured. 

So, in all, they'd likely end up with an entire workforce of people who either can't or prefer not to think for themselves, have poor judgment, or who would be nearly impossible to retain. What a result.

In the end, the market would eliminate this job requirement--Bozeman would become an employer of last resort. But I'm glad to hear that public outcry stepped in and corrected it before the market had a chance to adapt.

See more posts on the role of Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter in the workplace.

NPR aired a story claiming that employees are paying more attention to their wardrobe as a result of layoffs and belt-tightening.  Has workers' attire become more conservative and just better looking lately?  And, if so, is the appearance improvement possibly a tactic being used to prevent termination?

If this idea is based in reality, doesn't it imply that employees believe that dressing better is just plain better?  So why do they settle for less-than-better unless they think their jobs are on the hook?  Maybe the ones who don't "dress better" (as in, "improved"), should be rewarded because they (a) always strive to "dress better" (i.e., look their best); or (b) have enough confidence in themselves, their fashion sense, and their employer.

There may be something to it.

See recent posts relating to workplace attire:

Firm Defines "Business Casual" (a/k/a the "Nobody Wants to See Your Chest Hair" Memo)

What Not to Wear to Work: More Style Rules for the Modern Worker

What Happens When You Fail to Follow Workplace Dress Codes in BigLaw

Delaware employers should prepare to add another protected characteristic to their list.  Late last night, the Delaware General Assembly passed Senate Bill 121, which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. It passed the Senate after a three-hour debate. 

The bill is headed to Gov. Jack Markell for signature.  The Delaware News Journal reports that Rep. Pete Schwartkopf (D-14th Dist.), who helped push the bill through the House, has said that Markell is expected to sign.   

The bill had been introduced every year for the past decade without success.  Five of those bills had passed the House but stalled in Senate committees.  We reported on an earlier version of the bill, which passed the House in March but died in the Senate Executive Committee.  A full version of the bill is linked below.