IN THIS ISSUE:
RSVP TOday for our diversity awards luncheon
MIXER/vendor fair fast approaching!
legal brief: U.S. Supreme Court Expands Employee Protections Against Retaliation
Save the date: The National conference on aging
PLUS:
HUMOR LINES
Welcome to our second 2009 edition of our e-newsletter, RESOURCES. We are excited to produce this exciting forum for the communication of issues pertinent and relevant to HR Professionals.
We hope you enjoy the newsletter. It can only get better with your input and comments. If you have any articles for inclusion, comments or requests, please email them to Barry Lippold with the subject: "Resources Article" to: blippold@marcison.com.
Momentum is growing for the 6th Annual Diversity Awards Luncheon!
With the help of four InBusiness ads that were recently placed by SNHRA.
Starting a new Diversity tradition, the Southern Nevada Human Resources Association will present the premiere of our new award entitled the OYA Award. The OYA Award will be given to the company that demonstrates the highest level of Diversity. In Africa, Oya is the Yoruban Goddess of weather, especially tornadoes, lightning, rainstorms and transformation. She is also one of the most powerful of Brazilian Macumba deities. SNHRA will proudly present our first annual OYA Award in our Diversity Awards Luncheon 2009!
Be sure to RSVP to witness History!
Our 2009 Combination Mixer and Vendor Fair is being held on
February 19, 2009 at Canyon Gate Country Club.
Many interesting vendors have signed up for booths so be sure to RSVP before February 18, 2009!
Mixer/Vendor Fair Attendees:
$10 Entrance Fee
(includes 2 drinks per person and finger foods!)
Time:
5:30 pm - 8:00 pm
Vendor Set Up:
2:00 pm - 5:00 pm
Vendor Take Down:
8:00 pm - 9:00 pm
Prizes will be raffled off at 7:15 pm and winners MUST BE PRESENT TO WIN
Exhibiting Vendors:
Vendors MUST be a current member of SNHRA.
$150 Exhibit Fee for a 6ft. draped table.
Electrical is available at no additional charge.
We have a limit of 30 vendors due to Exhibit Space, so please register today. Vendors must prepay online.
Also, each vendor must provide a $50 raffle prize gift
to be given away at the end of the evening.
Attendees and Vendors, click here to Sign up!
Every person MUST be on the guest list or the guard will not allow you entry.
By: Patrick H. Hicks and Jeanine Navarro. Patrick H. Hicks is Founding Shareholder of Littler Mendelson’s Las Vegas and Reno offices. He can be reached at phicks@littler.com. Jeanine Navarro is an Associate in Littler Mendelson’s Las Vegas office. She can be reached at jnavarro@littler.com.
The United States Supreme Court recently held, in a unanimous opinion, that Title VII's antiretaliation provisions protect employees who disclose allegations of unlawful conduct while being interviewed as part of an internal investigation conducted by the employer. In Crawford v. Metropolitan Gov't of Nashville and Davidson County, No. 06-1595 (Jan 26, 2009), the Court held that an employee need not initiate a complaint in order to have engaged in protected activity under Title VII. Rather, when an employee reports inappropriate behavior during an internal investigation, that report qualifies as protected opposition to the inappropriate conduct. Crawford is just the latest in a series of Supreme Court decisions that further expand the concept of actionable retaliation and will, undoubtedly, lead to further litigation in this red hot area.
Defining "Opposition" for Purposes of Title VII's Anti-Retaliation Provisions
In Crawford, a human resources officer for Crawford's employer investigated rumors that an employee relations director was engaging in sexually harassing behavior. As part of her investigation, the human resources officer questioned a co-worker of the complainant, Vicky Crawford. In responding to questions about the alleged harasser's conduct, Crawford disclosed that the alleged harasser had sexually harassed Crawford in the past. Shortly after completing the investigation, Crawford's employer terminated her employment for suspected embezzlement. Crawford then filed a lawsuit alleging retaliation based upon her disclosure of harassment during the interview questioning.
An individual seeking to establish the first element of a retaliation case—i.e., that he or she engaged in "protected activity"—can do so in one of two ways: (1) opposing an unlawful employment practice ("opposition"); and (2) making a charge, testifying, assisting, or participating in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing under Title VI ("participation"). Crawford's employer argued that her statements about the alleged harasser were not protected activity because they did not qualify as either opposition or participation. The two lower courts agreed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that Title VII demands "active, consistent 'opposing' activities to warrant ... protection against retaliation" and that Crawford's conduct did not meet that standard because she never initiated a complaint prior to the investigation or took any further action after it.
The Supreme Court, ruling only on the issue of whether Crawford's conduct qualified as protected "opposition" under Title VII, unanimously reversed the Sixth Circuit. The Court explained that in the absence of a statutory definition, the word "oppose" should be given its ordinary meaning: "to resist or antagonize ... to contend against; to confront; resist; withstand." Most importantly, the Court stated that the ordinary meaning of "oppose" does not pertain only to conduct that is active and consistent, but goes further to include situations where an individual takes "no action at all to advance a position beyond disclosing it." Ultimately, the Court held that Crawford's conduct was opposition in this ordinary sense of the word, and, thus, qualified as protected activity under Title VII. To find otherwise, according to the Court, would be to announce a "freakish rule protecting an employee who reports discrimination on her own initiative, but not one who reports the same discrimination in the same words when her boss asks her a question." The Court further explained that any time an "employee communicates to her employer a belief that the employer has engaged in ... a form of employment discrimination, that communication virtually always constitutes the employee's opposition to the activity."
The Court rejected the employer's argument that a broader definition of "opposition" would discourage employers from conducting investigations into allegations of harassment. According to the Court, the affirmative defenses available to employers who exercise reasonable care to prevent and correct harassing conduct provide sufficient incentive to investigate allegations of unlawful behavior.
Implications for Employers
Retaliation charges are on the rise, making up more than 32% of all charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This trend is almost certain to continue. Crawford not only expands the definition of "opposition," but also leaves open the question of whether water cooler comments regarding discrimination constitute actionable opposition. Combined with another recent Supreme Court decision, Burlington Northern v. White, which dramatically expanded the definition of "adverse action" for purposes of Title VII's anti-retaliation provisions, Crawford makes clear that the Supreme Court is fostering an expansive view of actionable retaliation.
While Crawford does not directly address the issue of "participation," it serves as an important reminder to employers to carefully manage the process of employee discipline. Managers and supervisors must be advised to communicate with the company's human resources personnel regarding discipline and termination decisions, as such decision-makers could be unaware of an employee's participation in a recent investigation. Ongoing communication will help ensure that a manager is not taking action against an employee who recently participated in an internal investigation without appropriate consideration of all of the relevant facts and circumstances.
In addition, employers should be particularly vigilant in identifying potentially protected conduct, including disclosures made during internal investigations. Further, employers will need to ensure that procedures for documenting employee performance are followed closely, as such documentation may demonstrate performance problems that existed prior to any statements made by an employee in an investigative interview. Now is also a good time for employers to make sure they have up-to-date anti-retaliation policies and have trained managers and supervisors on the duty to prevent and avoid retaliation.
By: Rita Meier, Nevada Public Affairs Specialist
Social Security has a new online retirement application and a new celebrity spokesperson to help spread the word. 
You can apply for retirement benefits from the comfort of your home or office at www.socialsecurity.gov. There’s no need to drive to your local Social Security office or wait for an appointment with a Social Security representative. You can complete the new online retirement application in as little as 15 minutes. It's so easy!
In most cases, after you click the “Sign Now” button and submit the application electronically, that’s it. There are no forms to sign, and usually no additional documents are required. Social Security will contact you directly if more information is needed.
Award-winning actress Patty Duke has volunteered her services to let people know they can retire online. Ms. Duke has brought back the much beloved identical cousins Patty and Cathy Lane from the hit 1960's sitcom "The Patty Duke Show" for a series of Public Service Announcements that tell Americans it's now easier than ever to apply online.
If you are uncertain about when to retire, you can check out the online fact sheet, “When To Start Receiving Retirement Benefits.” And if you are not ready to retire, you can plan for retirement using Social Security’s online Retirement Estimator ((italicize please)). It is a great financial planning tool that will give you an immediate and personalized estimate of how much your retirement benefits would be if you stopped working at age 62, age 66, age 70 or any point in between.
To learn more about retiring online as well as to watch the new Public Service Announcements, go to www.socialsecurity.gov/pattyduke.
By our Newsletter sponsor Deborah Moore Jaquith, Director of Communications at the AARP Nevada State Office, www.aarp.org/nv
Join NCOA’s MaturityWorks Alliance Workforce Summit 2009!
Thursday, March 19th, 2009
7:30 AM – 5:00 PM
Bally Hotel, Las Vegas, NV
| Featured Speaker: Robert B. Reich “One of our leading thinkers about work and the economy” Former Secretary of Labor to speak on The Aging Workforce MATURE WORKERS—KEY TO A COMPETITIVE WORKFORCE |
 |
Hear why mature workers may be the key to a competitive workforce with keynote speaker, Robert Reich, one of the nation’s leading thinkers on work and the economy.
Then join a roundtable discussion with Mr. Reich and a distinguished panel of experts from AARP, NCOA, Duke Energy, CVS Caremark, Atlantic Philanthropies; Corporate Voices for Working Families and the ASA/Business Forum on Aging.
Workshops follow throughout the day and will address such topics as:
- Building the Health Care Workforce: Bold Solutions
- Recruiting and Retaining a 50+ workforce: Strategies and Returns
- Making the Business Case for Mature Workers
- Leading the Multi-Generational Workforce: Bridging the Gaps through Effective Workplace Coaching and Mentoring
- Innovative Partnerships and Practices to Retrain and Retain Workers Age 50+
- Lifelong Learning Accounts: How Business Makes an Investment in Workforce Learning and Development
Attend Special Summit Workshops on Challenges and Solutions for Meeting your Future Bottom Line. Find out:
- WHAT’S NEW: Looking beyond the short-term economy and planning for a changing workforce
- WHAT’S IMPORTANT: Retaining and recruiting experienced workers
- WHAT ARE THE SOLTIONS: Innovative partnerships for recruiting and retraining mature workers
- HOW YOU CAN DO IT: Case studies and practical tools
For event information:
Fee: $165 (includes lunch). Pre-registration is required.
To Register:
Please use our dedicated registration service is available by calling
1-866-734-6736, option 8 then 3
Please mention that you are attending the Workforce Summit only taking place Thursday, March 19.
I Knew I Was in Big Trouble at Work When...
...the Security guard made a complete inventory of my work area.
...my assistant began responding to my memos with, "Yeah, whatever."
...I got a "It's for you loser" sound receiving e-mail, & not a chime.
...my new Pentium was replaced with an 386sx-16 last weekend.
...the Human Resources Dept requested an update of my arrest record.
...the Boss asked if I still had a copy of my 5 year contract.
...I noticed co-workers measuring my office when I arrived at work.
...my parking spot was relocated next to the dumpster.
...my secretary says things like "Get the phone, my nails aren't dry."
...three people began helping me write a "desk manual" for my job.
...the LAN suddenly began backing-up my computer every 10 minutes.
...a large paper recycling box was placed next to my file cabinets.
...the receptionist began saying "Who???" to anyone calling on me.
...the new policy on sexual harassment included a photo of me.
Courtesty of http://www.hr.com/officehumor
Our Newsletter Sponsor:
We hope that all of our Members and Friends find the articles contained within R E S O U R C E S useful in your HR environment.
Many thanks to all of you who responded to our requests
for articles and research for this newsletter.
If you have anything you wish to contribute to the next issue, please do not hesitate to email Barry Lippold at blippold@marcison.com.
Contact Barry Lippold at 702-281-6528 for pricing and availability
to sponsor future R E S O U R C E S editions
Newsletter: 2009 Edition 2