Login  |  Register          Free Newsletter Subscription
Magazine Subscription
Jeff Neuburger

Jeff Neuburger is a Partner and Chair of the Technology, Media and Communications department of national law firm Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner, www.thelen.com. Jeff has been practicing law for over 20 years, works with clients across all industries, and is known as an expert in advising clients in dealing with the new issues confronting businesses in the 21st century.



User Stats

  • Recent Posts - 0
  • Avg Posts Per Week - 1
  • Posts Written - 24
Advertisement

Legal Landscape

Recent Posts

Am I required to give my employees sexual harassment training?

September 4, 2007 | Link This | Email this | Comments (0)

A handful of states have laws specifically requiring employers to provide sexual harassment training to certain employees, those states are noted below.

In addition, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, backed up by a number of U.S. Supreme Court decisions, states that all covered employers should provide anti-harassment training that covers all forms of prohibited harassment, not just sexual harassment. (Under federal law, for this purpose a covered employer is one that has 15 or more employees.)

The EEOC "Enforcement Guidance: Vicarious Employer Liability for Unlawful Harassment by Supervisors," provides the following:
"An employer should ensure that its supervisors and managers understand their responsibilities under the organiza
...Read More

Recent Posts

Can I sign a contract via e-mail?

August 27, 2007 | Link This | Email this | Comments (0)

Under the laws of most if not all states, you can sign most contracts via e-mail, if you have the necessary intent to do so.

A recent judicial opinion applying New York law provides an illustration.

SD Protection, Inc. V. Del Rio

The court in SD Protection, Inc. v. Del Rio concluded that it was possible for an employee to "sign" an employment contract containing a non-compete clause via an exchange of e-mail with the employer.

Edward Del Rio was hired by SD Protection, Inc., as a field manager in its tour services business. Before Del Rio was hired, SD apparently sent him a printed contact. The printed contract contained a non-compete cl...Read More



Recent Posts

New Federal Regulations on No-Match Letters Finally Adopted

August 23, 2007 | Link This | Email this | Comments (0)

As expected, the Department of Homeland Security announced the final adoption of new rules governing employer responses to Social Security Administration "No-Match" letters. Under the new regulations, effective on September 14, an employer that does not follow up on a No-Match letter risks being charged with knowingly employing an unauthorized worker.

What is a No-Match letter?

A No-Match letter is generated when the name and social security number of an employee, submitted by an employer on a W-2 form, do not match the record of the Social Security Administration. A No-Match letter is a notification of that fact from the SSA to the employer, or from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that the immigration-status or employment-authorization documentation ...Read More

Recent Posts

New Rules Ready on Social Security "No Match" Letters

August 6, 2007 | Link This | Email this | Comments (0)

Sometimes it is important for employers to know what Congress did do, and sometimes it's important to know what Congress didn't do. Congress adjourned for the summer yesterday, and what it didn't do is enact controversial immigration reform legislation. But that doesn't mean that nothing new is happening with immigration law.

As discussed in this news article, last summer the U.S. Customs and Immigration bureau in the Department of Homeland Security proposed new regulations governing what employers must do when the Social Security Administration flags an employee's social security number. This is referred to as receiving a "no-match" letter. 
But the proposed regulations were placed on hold while Congress debated immigration reform legislation. Now that the reform legislation h...Read More

Recent Posts

Parents and other caregivers as employees - 18 ways to violate federal antidiscrimination laws

July 27, 2007 | Link This | Email this | Comments (1)

In the twenty-first century, the average American family no longer fits the "working dad, mom at home" stereotype portrayed in sitcoms from Leave It To Beaver to Everybody Loves Raymond. One result of the change in family demographics is that employee caretaking responsibilities, both childcare and eldercare, present workplace issues with which employers must deal. And deal with evenhandedly, or else run afoul of federal antidiscrimination laws.

New federal guidelines

The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has decided to address these issues in a new document, Unlawful Disparate Treatment of Workers with Caregiving Responsibilities. The guidance deals with employer responsibilities under Title VII, which prohibits disparate treatment based...Read More



Blogs Recent Posts Total Posts
Legal Landscape 0 24

Advertisements



SPONSORED LINKS


About Us   |   Advertising Info   |   Site Map   |   Contact Us   |   Free Subscriptions   |   Affiliate Links
©2008 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Please visit these other Reed Business sites