Legal Aid Employment Law

Q. Can an employer establish different probationary periods for new employees?

A. An employer is free to establish a probationary period. This could make the employer vulnerable to a claim of discrimination while probationary periods may be established for categories of employees, or different employees. An employer should be prepared to justify any differences.

Q. Are employees entitled to see their documents?

A. Assuming that the state has a statute (or case law) regulating access to personnel files, an employer is not required to let a worker view his/her document. It is normally considered to be the company's property, even though the document is all about the employee.

Q. Is a business required to provide disability insurance coverage for the workers?

A. No. While it is common to supply "employee benefit" policy for workers, the law typically does not require a business to achieve that. Nonetheless, in the event of disability insurance that's a component of an employer-sponsored wellness program, that scenario is changing. Specifically, the Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) which took effect January 1, 1998, and one of the main features of the Act, guarantees the continued access to health insurance, irrespective of medical condition, for those already with policy through employment or otherwise. For this reason, and others once health insurance is in place for an individual, relating to state legislation and court cases, although there may be no first obligation to provide health insurance it will stay accessible. This is particularly so in labour situations governed by collective bargaining agreements.

Q. What are some common "causes" for being fired?

(2) an attendance problem;

Q. Does the federal law cover "same-sex" harassment?

A. Absolutely. A case decided by the US Supreme Court on March 4, 1998 involved a man worker working on an oil rig, who claimed he had been the victim of harassment from employees. Same sex sexual harassment is illegal under the Federal law was unanimously held by the Supreme Court, and it doesn't matter if the gender harasser was not a homosexual or was.