Posts from November 2010.

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.



Jump to Page