As businesses become more interconnected, the risk of a third-party data breach at your organization becomes more imminent. It’s no longer enough to simply secure your organization’s network systems and data.
READ THE eBOOK
Fall is in the air. Which means it’s open enrollment time! If your organization is one of the many heading into open enrollment, here are some common open enrollment questions, answered.
READ THE ARTICLE
The law creates potential exposures and legal implications for employers.
Will 2019 be the year of the cyber criminal? Read about this and other cybersecurity risks in the latest Threat Intelligence report.
READ THE ARTICLE
Employers who are required to file EEO-1 Component 2 pay data for 2017 and 2018 must still do so by September 30, 2019. So, what has changed? On September 12, 2019, the EEOC published a Notice in the Federal Register regarding the collection of EEO-1 data from employers. Surprisingly, this Notice contained a substantially revised burden assessment with regard to the collection and filing of EEO-1 data.
U.S. employers are not immune from the effects of the opioid crisis. The potential workplace impacts which stem from employee opioid abuse include an increase in employee absenteeism, excessive sick day use, low productivity, mistakes, errors and accidents, workplace stress, increase in healthcare costs, and high employee turnover. Because of these negative effects, many employers have decided to take a proactive approach to combat these problems.
If you are an EEO-1 filer, you probably already know that you may have an additional reporting requirement this year relative to your existing EEO-1 reporting obligations. Called Component 2 data, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is now requiring most EEO-1 filers to submit compensation data and hours worked as part of their EEO-1 reporting obligation by September 30, 2019.
From the prevalence of tablets, computers and cell phones, to cameras and electronic tracking devices, employees and employers in the workplace are working and communicating using technology — and are monitoring, watching, and recording each other like never before.
Aside from the Equal Pay Act (EPA), some states and municipalities have decided to take additional action to address gender pay inequity. Some of these newer laws have been designed to combat systemic pay inequity at the time of hire. These so-called “salary history bans” prohibit employers from asking job applicants about their past salary history. The public policy behind the rule is a simple one — preventing new employers from taking past salary history into account will help to break the cycle of systemic pay inequity.
By now, all employers know they should be doing something more to prevent workplace harassment. The problem is, many employers still don’t know what doing more really means. More frequent training? More effective training? More what exactly?
Whether it’s petty theft, a complex embezzlement scheme or the threat of workplace violence, when it comes to keeping your business and employees safe, you have to consider the possibility that some workplace crimes may be perpetrated by your own employees. In addition to the direct costs of the injuries and losses stemming from the criminal activity, you may face additional liability where you knew or should have known that your employee was unfit and posed a risk to others and you failed to exercise reasonable care in hiring or in retaining that individual. So how do you protect your business and employees from workplace crime?
Health savings account (HSA) plan designs and general purpose health flexible spending arrangements (sometimes called flexible spending accounts) are two common employee benefit offerings. Both provide employees with tax advantages and the ability to save for qualified medical expenses. However, they don’t pair well and, depending on plan design, can have unintended consequences for your employees.
Given the ease in which employers can monitor employees’ use of computers and given the ubiquitous nature of cell phones allowing employees to record conversations or take photographs with the tap of a finger, what limitations, if any, should be placed on workplace monitoring and recordings?
Send a Message
Find a Location