HR Advisory – Employers Will Be Required to Report 2017 and 2018 Pay Data on EEO-1
The EEOC has announced that employers required to file an EEO-1 report will need to submit Component 2, pay data for 2017 and 2018 by Sept. 30, 2019. The agency said it could make the Component 2 collection portal available to employers by mid-July and would provide information and training to employers prior to that date.
Download Compliance Bulletin here
HR Advisory – Job Applicants and Social Media
If you’re ignoring social media, you’re denying an increasingly common recruitment tactic While there can be benefits to screening the internet for public information about a job candidate, be aware of the many risks associated with this new-age method.
How to use social media effectively for applicant screening:
- Create a social media screening policy
- Prepare screening questions for the position
- Conduct the screening
- Prepare and provide a report to the hiring manager
- Retain the documentation
How to help minimize risk through social media screenings:
- If you’re screening, screen everyone. Don’t just review one applicant or certain types of applicants.
- Remember a decision should be made based on skill and experience above everything else.
- Conduct in-person interviews first before social media screenings.
- Make sure the screener is removed from the hiring process to ensure unbiased research.
- If you use a third party to conduct screenings, be aware of laws, such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, that may require you to get authorization, provide notices or make certain disclosures.
- Allow applicants to explain any information you’ve found online that you find damaging.
- Managers should be forbidden from considering protected classes when making an employment decision.
- Managers must keep notes to demonstrate a hiring decision was based on legitimate business reasons.
- Follow the laws relating to retaining records during the application process.
- Ensure your hiring manager (and anyone involved in the recruitment process) is aware of the law prohibiting employers from requesting applicants to disclose personal social media.
If you have any questions, feel free to reach out at any time.
HR Advisory – Owning Your Interactive Process
The ADA and California’s FEHA disability regulations require employers to initiate the interactive process when any of the following events occur:
- An applicant or employee with a known disability requests an accommodation.
- The employer becomes aware of the need for an accommodation through a third party.
- The employer becomes aware of the need for an accommodation by observation.
- The employer becomes aware of the possible need for accommodation because the employee has a disability and has exhausted leave under the California Workers’ Compensation Act, the California Family Rights Act, or the Family and Medical Leave Act, but the employee’s health care provider indicates that further leave is necessary for the employee to perform the essential functions of his job. Employers who offer to engage in the interactive process when an employee has exhausted a leave of absence are not in violation of laws prohibiting inquiries into medical information.
To comply with FEHA, an employer may either:
- Grant the employee or applicant’s requested accommodation, or
- Reject the initial accommodation and initiate discussion regarding alternatives.
When the disability or need for accommodation is not obvious, the employer may require an employee requesting accommodation to provide reasonable medical documentation. Employers may consult an expert, such as a company physician, during the interactive process.
When needed to assess a requested accommodation, the employer shall analyze the essential functions of the employee’s job.
In consultation with the employee, the employer should identify potential accommodations for the employee, and consider the effectiveness of the accommodation to allow the employee to perform essential functions and, the employee’s preference in implementing an accommodation. A record of the interactive process should be maintained by the employer.
Download the Interactive Process Form
HR Advisory – I-9 audits
As many of you are aware, ICE enforcement has indicated they will be increasing their efforts, particularly in Northern California.
Effective January 1, 2018, The Immigrant Worker Protection Act (AB 450) provides California workers with protection from immigration enforcement while on the job.
Although I-9 compliance is just one piece of this discussion, Owen-Dunn would like to remind employers:
- To maintain original I-9 forms for current employees and retain I-9 forms for former employees for three years after the date of hire, or one year after the date employment ends, whichever is later.
- I-9 forms should be stored separately from other personnel files.
- A “diary” system should be in place to re-verify all employees who present work authorization that bears an expiration date and to accurately dispose of old forms.
- One recommended way of keeping I-9 documents separate is to use three separate notebook binders designated for:
- Current employees for whom re-verification will not be necessary
- Employees requiring re-verification
- Terminated employees
Download I-9 Retention Worksheet
Download Guidance for Employers Conducting Internal I-9 Audits
10 Common Employee Handbook Mistakes
Your employee handbook can be a critical tool to establish ground rules for your organization or a crack in your defense of an employment practice related claim. With the current political and litigious climate, a concise and compliant handbook with policies that employees can understand and managers can enforce is essential.
Avoid making common employee handbook mistakes and be proactive about compliance. If you haven’t done so in the past six months, consider reviewing and updating your employee handbook. You’ll thank us later.
Download Employee Handbook Checklist
HR Advisory – Termination for Violation of Attendance Policy
California’s mandatory Paid Sick Leave Law has made it challenging for employers to take disciplinary action with employees who have poor work attendance.
A recent court decision has boosted confidence in an employers’ ability to enforce good attendance policies that are administered fairly and in good faith.
If you have any questions, feel free to reach out at any time.