Compliance Stuff

A recent jury verdict reminds employers of their reasonable accommodation obligations for applicants under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), in the context of drug testing. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued a retirement community for denying employment to an applicant based on a failed drug test—one that the applicant warned the employer she would fail because of her medications. And, as the EEOC announced in a recent  press release , a jury awarded her over $400,000 in damages. Quick Hits A jury awarded more than $400,000 in damages to an applicant who was denied employment due to a failed drug test—one that the applicant, a veteran, informed the employer she might fail because of legally prescribed medications she took for PTSD . The EEOC successfully argued that the employer, a retirement community, violated the ADA by failing to allow the applicant to explain her non-negative drug test result . The verdict serves as a reminder for employers ...

The OSHA-NIOSH Small Business Checklist App can improve safety and health in the workplace. The app is a free tool that features checklists and other workplace safety and health resources for small businesses. The app was developed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and NIOSH and is based on the  OSHA-NIOSH Small Business Safety and Health Handbook. Download IOS free today ‎ Android (coming soon) IOS (Apple Store) App Features: The app includes the following features: Self-inspection checklists to help small businesses identify workplace hazards. Checklists were designed for general industry (manufacturing, retail, services, etc.), not for construction or maritime. Select favorite checklists relevant to your business. Add photos and comments to items within checklists. OSHA and NIOSH web resources available within checklists. Examples of checklist topics: Safety and Health Programs Recordkeeping Electrical Safety Ergonomics Fire protection Hazard communica...

In  Lawson v. Spirit AeroSystems , Inc. , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld the forfeiture of certain stock awards for violating a covenant not to compete.  Like the Seventh Circuit in  LKQ Corp. v. Rutledge (which applied Delaware law), the Tenth Circuit concluded that, under Kansas law, the remedy of forfeiting future compensation is not subject to the same reasonableness standard as traditional enforcement of a non-compete obligation.  The Tenth Circuit reached this conclusion even though the executive’s agreement included both a forfeiture-for-competition provision and traditional enforcement rights ( i.e. , the right for the company to pursue monetary damages and specific performance), because the agreement terms enabled the forfeiture provision to be severed from the traditional enforcement provisions. Background and the Court’s Analysis A retirement agreement allowed the former CEO of Spirit AeroSystems (“Spirit”) to receive cash payments ...

On May 22, the U.S. Supreme Court  granted a stay  allowing for the Trump administration’s termination of Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) chair Cathy Harris to stand while her lawsuit challenging her termination works its way through the courts. The order formalizes a temporary emergency stay granted in April and means that the MSPB, the quasi-judicial agency which oversees retaliation cases for federal employee whistleblowers, will continue without a quorum needed to issue decisions. Whistleblower advocates have  characterized the firing of Harris without cause as creating a crisis for federal whistleblowers . Harris was fired by President Trump on February 10. Sh e quickly challenged her termination, claiming it was illegal because under federal law, members of the MSPB may be removed from office “only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” While U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a ruling temporarily reinstati...

  Managing conflicts of interest is a big part of any corporate compliance officer’s job. Today we have a fascinating glimpse of how complicated that work can be, courtesy of the Wall Street Journal and its detailed account of how the now-former Kohl’s CEO Ashley Buchanan sent company business to his girlfriend. You probably remember the original story, which first hit the headlines on May 1. That was the day the  $16 billion retail chain fired Buchanan , who had arrived as CEO only four months earlier, because Buchanan had “directed the company to engage in vendor transactions that involved undisclosed conflicts of interest.” It soon became clear that the conflict  was Buchanan steering consulting and business contracts to Chandra Holt  — a former colleague from Walmart, an accomplished business executive in her own right, and Buchanan’s romantic partner for years. Lots of people in the ethics and compliance community have praised Kohl’s board for its commitment to ...