Tag Archives: Employment Laws

by | September 14, 2013 · 1:37 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Immigration And Customs Enforcement (ICE) Employment Audits Targeted Restaurants (38%) In 2012; “Silent Raids” Force Workers To Lose Jobs, Large Fines For “Paperwork Errors”

“The administration appears to start with the presumption that employers are not telling the truth about their listed employees…”

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement“…(an Ohio) restaurant was audited in early 2012. No undocumented workers were found…but paperwork errors resulted in a $27,500 fine, which didn’t get reduced. The company paid another $7,500 to have an immigration attorney handle the case and review the I-9 forms of the other 13 restaurants to make sure they were filled out correctly…”

“In late 2010, (a national restaurant) chain lost about 450 Minnesota workers, between 30% and 40% of its employees there…Last year, the burrito chain announced it was under federal investigation over possible criminal securities law violations related to communications to investors of work-authorization compliance. The company has said it is cooperating fully with the investigation…”

The U.S. government has launched a fresh crackdown on employers suspected of hiring illegal immigrants by notifying about 1,000 businesses across the country in recent weeks they must submit documents for audits. The so-called “silent raids” are the largest since July 2009 when just as many companies were notified, according to immigration attorneys, and weren’t publicly disclosed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency that conducts such inspections.

While the audits don’t lead to the deportation of a firm’s illegal workers, they lose their jobs if discovered. Critics of the crackdown say it drives more immigrants to eploitative, off-the-books work. For employers, the audits can lead to deep losses in productivity, in addition to civil and criminal fines, and many workers end up getting hired by competitors.

For more:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324755104579071331936331534.html

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Immigration And Customs Enforcement (ICE) Employment Audits Targeted Restaurants (38%) In 2012; “Silent Raids” Force Workers To Lose Jobs, Large Fines For “Paperwork Errors”

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

by | November 21, 2012 · 7:15 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotel "Off-Duty Access Policies" Cannot Be At "Management Unlimited Discretion" According To National Labor Relations Board (NRLB) Decision

In a 2-1 decision, the (National Labor Relations Board) struck down a Marriott property’s policy prohibiting off-duty employees from accessing the hotel property without a manager’s approval. In doing so, the board evaluated Marriott’s rule in light of well-established case law dating back four decades.

Many hotels maintain off-duty access policies that limit but do not prohibit employees from accessing the hotel property during off-duty hours. The policy might require an employee to obtain advance permission from management and/or limit access to employer-sponsored events. Such a policy seems reasonable.

The hotel or resort might want to grant access to employees as an employee benefit. Employee discounts, access to restaurants, golf courses, spa facilities and ski slopes, for example, are valuable employee benefits. Of course, the hotel needs to balance legitimate business concerns, such as maintaining the security of its premises and guests, as well as assuring its guests have ready access to facilities.

Under that 1976 case, the NLRB established a three-part test for whether off-duty access restrictions are legal. For an off-duty access rule to be valid under that test, the policy must:

1) limit access only to the interior of the facility and other working areas;

2) be clearly disseminated to employees; and

3) apply to any off-duty employee seeking access for any reason and not just those engaging in union activity.

In the Marriott case, issued 28 September, the board held that because the rule was not a uniform ban on access but instead gave management unlimited discretion to determine when to permit access, it could lead employees to believe they could not engage in union organizing or other protected activity without a manager’s approval. The board struck down the rule as unlawful and said a “narrow, extremely specific” off-duty access rule might be deemed valid. However, it provided no guidance as to what type of rule is acceptable.

This decision puts hospitality employers in an untenable position. The hotel has one of three options:

1) adopt a policy limiting all off-duty access, even for legitimate reasons such as picking up a paycheck or attending special events;

2) grant employees access to the property without any restrictions; or

3) prepare a policy with narrow exceptions for special circumstances and hope the policy survives legal scrutiny.

For more:  http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/Articles.aspx/9417/NLRBs-decisions-impacts-hotel-policies

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hotel "Off-Duty Access Policies" Cannot Be At "Management Unlimited Discretion" According To National Labor Relations Board (NRLB) Decision

Filed under Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | July 2, 2012 · 7:38 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Indiana Restaurants Fined For Child Labor Law Violations Involving Break Regulations

If a minor age 14-17 works six or more hours in a shift, an employer is required to give the minor one or two breaks totaling at least 30 minutes. Hour violations occur when a minor works past the legally defined deadline for the minor’s age.

In most cases, minors may not work during school hours, from 7:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m., on school days. While 16- and 17-year-olds may work during school hours with written permission from the school, there is no such exemption for 14- and 15-year-olds.

Five East Central Indiana restaurants have been fined within the past year for repeat violations of child labor laws.

The Ponderosa Steakhouse in Portland received the biggest penalty, $2,200, after its third violation in a year of break regulations involving minors.The restaurant also was fined $400 for hour violations involving two minors.

Modern child labor laws serve a dual purpose based on their roots in compulsory education, according to the Indiana Department of Labor. The first is to make certain that young people pursue education, and the second is to protect young workers from suffering injury, illness or death in the workplace.

One East Central Indiana employer received a warning for employing a minor in a hazardous/prohibited occupation following a workplace fatality.

The labor department gives employers an opportunity to protest violations within 30 days of being notified of a fine. Several restaurants received warnings for employing minors during school hours but were not fined because it was a first offense.

For more:  http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20120702/NEWS01/307020015

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Indiana Restaurants Fined For Child Labor Law Violations Involving Break Regulations

Filed under Labor Issues, Liability, Maintenance, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,