With 53 presumptive-positive cases of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in Michigan as of March 15, Michigan is taking proactive steps to reduce transmission of the virus. Below is a brief synopsis of what employers need to know.

On March 10, 2020, Michigan’s Governor Gretchen Whitmer declared a state of emergency in Executive Order 2020-4.

The 2019 novel coronavirus continues to evolve and has been officially named COVID-19 by the World Health Organization replacing the previous 2019-nCoV designation. There are now over 46,000 confirmed cases across the globe, with the vast majority in mainland China, and 15 confirmed cases in the U.S. Many details about the virus are unknown

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) first identified in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China continues to raise not only health concerns, but issues for employers and employees. Information about the virus continues to evolve. After the World Health Organization declared a Public Health Emergency due to the 2019-nCoV, the Trump Administration announced that, as of

News of an outbreak of a new coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China raises issues for employers and employees about the appropriate workplace responses. Many employers are seeking guidance on how best to respond to workplace concerns, especially those with employees engaged in international travel, as well as employers in the healthcare, airline,

2019 has brought a flurry of new leave and accommodation laws.  In fact, in the first 8 months of 2019, more than 20 new laws in this area have passed.

The states (and US territory) that passed new laws, expanded or otherwise amended existing leave and accommodation laws, or had new laws go into effect

California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Assembly Bill 1976, expanding California employer obligations respective to employee lactation accommodation. Under preexisting California Labor Code section 1031, an employer was required to make available a private location, other than a toilet stall, for an employee to express milk for an infant child, and provide employees

When used lawfully, post-offer, pre-employment medical examinations can be a powerful tool. But a recent federal district court case demonstrates the importance of carefully implementing such programs.  In EEOC v. M.G.H. Family Health Center, Cause No. 1:15-CV-952 (E.D. Mich. 1/27/2017 ), the employer hired an employee and asked her to participate in a medical

In a case addressing a challenging accommodation scenario faced by many employers, a Florida District Court held in Hargett v. Florida Atlantic University Board of Trustees that an employee seeking a less stressful environment and an end to hostile confrontations with her manager was not seeking a reasonable accommodation.  The employee suffered from epilepsy  with

On August 25, 2016, the EEOC issued its Enforcement Guidance on Retaliation and Related Issues. In addition to outlining expanded definitions of “opposition” and “participation” activity with respect to retaliation claims, the EEOC also addressed section 503(b) of the ADA.  Section 503(b) makes it unlawful to “coerce, intimidate, threaten or interfere” with an individual who attempts to exercise ADA rights or one who assists or encourages others to do so.

What Makes ADA Interference Different

In its guidance, the EEOC notes the interference provisions of the ADA are broader than the statute’s anti-retaliation provisions. Specifically, actions that may not be materially adverse for a retaliation claim may suffice for an interference action.  Another distinguishing feature of an ADA interference claim, according to the agency, is that an individual pursuing relief need not be a qualified person with a disability.
Continue Reading