Kansas Employment Law Blog Photo
 
Judging the Sincerity of Religious Beliefs
12/17/2020
By: Morgan Geffre
In many situations, the question of whether an employee’s request for a religious accommodation is tied to sincere religious beliefs is not at issue. Instead, employers simply need to assess whether they can provide the accommodation without causing an undue hardship. Where an employer does question whether the employee sincerely holds those beliefs—an issue that might arise if an employee asserts a dubious religious objection to the COVID vaccine—it should look to the EEOC’s long-standing guidance on the level of inquiry it can make.
 
What are “religious” beliefs and practices?
 
According to the EEOC, religious practices include the “moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views.” Religion typically concerns “ultimate ideas” about “life, purpose, and death.” The EEOC does not protect beliefs merely because they are strongly held. Whether a practice is religious depends on the employee’s motivation. Social, political, or economic philosophies, as well as personal preferences, are not protected as religious beliefs under Title VII.
 
The EEOC does grant employees the benefit of the doubt. Employers should not dismiss the beliefs simply because the employee’s practices deviate from the exact tenants of a religion, or because few or no people adhere to those religious beliefs. The EEOC cautions employers that      Continue Reading...
 
Promises, Promises, Promises: The Perils of the Christmas Bonus
12/7/2020
By: Morgan Geffre

While we may all look back and laugh at Clark Griswold from National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation and his meltdown from not receiving a Christmas bonus, that may be a very real scenario for many employees this year following the struggles the COVID-19 pandemic brought to most employers.

Although canceling employee bonuses is a great setup for a comedy, year-end bonuses can lead to legal snags that are no laughing matter for employers. Under Kansas wage payment laws and general principles of contract law, employers are legally obligated to pay bonuses when employees meet the requirements to become eligible for and earn them. Simply put, employers must own up to promises they make to employees about pay.
 
For example, if you tell employees at the beginning of the year that you will pay them a holiday bonus of a set amount at the end of the year, you must pay the bonus to employees whose employment continues throughout the year. However, a past practice of giving discretionary Christmas bonuses does not give rise to a legal obligation to pay bonuses of a particular amount, or at all, in subsequent years. That seems simple enough. But, employers can unwittingly create a legal obligation if they include a Christmas bonus in an itemized list of compensation and benefits in an offer letter or annual compensation statement.
 
Year-end bonuses based on individual, department, or company productivity goals or profits can also create legal headaches. The key is to have clear, well-written bonus policies that pass legal muster.      Continue Reading...
 
Kansas Voting Leave Law 101
09/30/2020
By: Morgan Geffre

With elections looming on November 3, it is important for employers to prepare for leave requests associated with voting. Federal law does not require employers to provide leave to vote, but most states do, especially when work hours do not allow sufficient time to vote while the polls are open. Laws also vary between states on the amount of time, whether notice is required, whether the time is paid, and whether the employer can dictate which hours the employee may take leave to vote.

In Kansas, employees are entitled to two consecutive hours of paid time to vote. However, outside the lunch break, employers may specify when the two-hour period may be taken and can require that the two-hour period be taken prior to or after an employee’s regular working hours. For example, if the polls are open from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm and the employee’s scheduled shift is from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, the employer does not have to provide paid leave because the employee has two consecutive hours after work to vote. Any employer who intentionally obstructs an employee from voting or imposes a penalty on an employee who takes leave to vote is subject to a class A misdemeanor.

One developing area of voting leave law is how employers handle the greater flexibility in voting. If the employee has the option to vote in advance or by mail, does the employee still qualify for leave? Kansas has not yet addressed this question, but      Continue Reading...

 
EEOC Updates COVID-19 Guidance for COVID-19 Testing and ADA Accommodations
09/22/2020
By: Morgan Geffre

On September 8, the EEOC updated its guidance with respect to what employers should know about COVID-19, the ADA Rehabilitation Act, and other EEO laws. Generally, the updates act to clarify previously taken positions of the EEOC.

Two of the important clarifications involve the EEOC’s position on administering COVID-19 tests to employees, and an employers’ ability to invite employees to request disability accommodations.

  1. Employers are still able to administer COVID-19 tests if they are accurate and reliable, but the EEOC notes the consideration of false positives and negatives. The EEOC also added the disclaimer that a negative test result does not mean the employee won’t contract COVID-19, and employers should continue requiring social distancing measures.
  2. Many employers are still operating from home. In preparation for returning to the physical workplace, the EEOC allows employers to invite employees to submit requests for disability accommodations in advance of their return. This would simply start the interactive process. Those employees who do not request an accommodation in advance would not be barred from later asking.
 
DOL Updates FFCRA Q&As for Fall 2020 School Year
08/31/2020
By: Morgan Geffre

The Department of Labor continues to update the Q&As regarding the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA). The recent updates have big impacts on parents of school-aged children as schools tackle the decision of how to move forward. No matter what local schools and parents decide, it is important that employers be prepared.

Hybrid Learning: Under this model, children would alternate between days attending school in person and participating in remote learning. Here, parents would be allowed to take FFCRA leave on the days that the child is home participating in remote learning, because school is effectively “closed” on the days of remote learning. The requirement still applies that the employee must actually need to care for the child during that time and there is no other suitable person to do so.

Remote Learning: Some schools are choosing to proceed with only remote learning because of COVID-19. Employees with children who attend such schools would be eligible for FFCRA leave while the school is closed, as long as the employee meets the other requirements. In the event the school reopens at a later time, the employee may lose FFCRA eligibility.

Elective Remote Learning: If an employee has the option of allowing his or her child to attend in person classes or participate in remote learning, the situation changes. Employees who voluntarily sign up for remote learning out of fear their child will contract COVID-19 will lose eligibility for leave under the FFCRA because the school      Continue Reading...

 


Editors
Don Berner Image
Don Berner, the Labor Law, OSHA, & Immigration Law Guy
Boyd Byers Image
Boyd Byers, the General Employment Law Guy
Jason Lacey Image
Jason Lacey, the Employee Benefits Guy
Additional Sources
Subscribe to Kansas Employment Law Letter Image
Subscribe to Kansas Legislative Insights Image