Q&A on compensation, discrimination, drug testing
RUNNING A BUSINESS » or managing a single unit, department, or team within a business — isn’t easy. Questions that have legal and/or regulatory implications pop up on a regular basis. Answers to some of those questions aren’t always straightforward, and can require insight into various statutes as well as case law. This article shares several common scenarios and some interpretive time, the event must meet four criteria. It must:
• Be outside normal working hours, • Be completely voluntary, • Not be related to the job, • Not involve productive work. Unless the teambuilding activity is directly related to the employees’ jobs or the employees are performing “productive work” during the event, the company is not required to pay those who attend.
However, federal regulations state that an event is not voluntary if an employee’s “present working conditions or the continuance of his employment would be adversely affected by non-attendance.” In other words, if the employees who do not attend would be denied future opportunities, just as your employee has stated, it may not qualify as voluntary and should be paid.
Q: Due to the changing nature of our company’s work, we need to restructure our current staff of delivery drivers. We’ll be requiring them to obtain a new class of license and drive a new class of vehicle. We also recently hired several new drivers, all of whom are in their 20s. One of our longest-tenured employees has told us he does not intend to seek the new license and has no interest in driving the new vehicles. Because he’s in his 60s, are we risking age discrimination claims if we terminate and replace him with one of the new, younger drivers?
A: If the requirements of the job have changed and the current employee is not willing to obtain the proper training/credentials or perform the work,
you are within your rights to dismiss him, regardless of age. That said, your concern about age discrimination is valid, even though it seems not to be a factor in the decision. The best defense is to document every conversation that has been had about this proposed change with the
current employee, including his unwillingness to adapt. Maintain this documentation even after the employee is dismissed, should you decide to move ahead with termination.
Before you settle on termination, you may want to thoroughly explain to the current employee that his existing position will be eliminated, and you will no longer have a need for his services without the proper credentials. Document the conversation, and move forward as you see fit if he is still unwilling. If he is willing to adapt once he understands what’s at stake, you may find yourself in the position to retain an experienced employee, which could benefit the company.
Q: We work in a food processing facility with a strict drug-free workplace policy. There are many sharp objects in our facility, and minor accidents occur occasionally. Our current policy states that we will drug test any employee who is involved in an accident. Is this a reasonable policy given the nature of our work, or should we narrow our criteria for testing?
A: Mandatory drug testing after every incident is a bad idea for your company (it’s expensive and drugs are not always suspected) and your employees (mandatory testing
could discourage accident reporting and decrease safety). Instead, consider revising your policy to state that you will test after every accident in which drug or alcohol use is suspected to be a contributing factor. This approach is consistent with OSHA’s 2016 “Rule to Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses.”