Page 243 - Introduction to Business

CHAPTER 6 Human Resources Management 217

Prong Two of the ADA’s definition of disability is a little more subtle in that it
protects persons having records of a disability, even if they no longer have the dis-
ability. For example, the ADA prohibits not hiring or promoting an individual who
previously had cancer but is now cured.
Prong Three protects people who are regarded as having an impairment even
though this is not the case. For example, the ADA prohibits an employer not pro-
moting an employee because of a rumor that the employee has been infected with
the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. This law passed in 1993 requires
organizations with 50 or more employees to provide employees who have worked
at least 1250 hours during the prior 12 months up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave on
the birth or adoption of a child or if the employee or his or her spouse, child, or par-
ent is seriously ill. Despite the fact that the required leave is unpaid, a number of
business organizations lobbied strenuously against this legislation on the grounds
that it would lead to considerable work scheduling and other problems. Even so,
there have been numerous proposals to broaden the scope of the Family and Med-
ical Leave Act (FMLA) to allow employees to take time off for family events other
than births or illnesses.

State Regulation

There has also during the past few decades been an increase in state regulation of
HRM. State regulation has come by way of both state laws and state court decisions.

Employment-at-Will. During the past few decades state courts throughout
the country have been chipping away at the doctrine of employment-at-will on a
case-by-case basis. Indeed, today the majority of state courts recognize a public
policy exception to this doctrine. For example, numerous courts have intervened
where employers have fired employees for being out on jury duty; remember, under
the strict employment-at-will doctrine, an employer can fire an employee for any
reason at any time. In essence, these courts have held that the public policy in favor
of jury trials outweighs the employer’s right to fire an employee. The state of Mon-
tana has enacted a state law comprehensively protecting employees from wrongful
discharge, and thus statutorily overturning the doctrine of employment-at-will in
that state. The Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act states that an Montana Wrongful Discharge from
employer’s discharge of an employee is wrongful, or unlawful, if it was against pub- Employment Act A law in the state of
Montana outlawing the doctrine of
lic policy, in violation of the employer’s written personnel policy, or not for good
employment-at-will
cause providing that the employee has passed the employer’s workplace proba-
17
tionary period. The good cause provision in the Montana statute is very similar to
that in union labor contracts. Thus, the Montana Wrongful Discharge from Employ-
ment Act gives all employees in that state very broad protection from being fired by
employers for nonlegitimate business reasons.

Off-Duty Conduct Statutes. The vast majority of states in the United States
have also passed laws protecting employees from being discriminated against by
employers because of their lawful off-duty conduct. Interestingly, these off-duty off-duty conduct statutes State laws
conduct statutes started being widely enacted in the 1980s because of strong lob- protecting in various degrees employee
off-duty conduct
bying by the tobacco industry, which had become very concerned that employees
were not being hired or were even being fired because they were smokers. As a
result, most states today have laws that at least protect employees from any adverse
employment action due to their off-duty use of tobacco and other lawful products.

Copyright 2010 Cengage Learning, Inc. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.