Biden proposes new rules to protect outdoor workers
With some parts of America continuing to experience severe high heat, new regulations have been proposed to protect workers who have to work in high temperature environments. The measure – which would affect about 35 million workers, according to the government – would apply to those working both inside or outside, who can expect to be exposed to a heat index of 80 degrees Fahrenheit (26 degrees Celsius) or higher). In such situations employers will be required to develop heat injury and illness prevention plans and appoint a workplace heat safety coordinator. If the heat index hits 80 degrees Fahrenheit, workers would have to be provided with drinking water and access to break areas in the shade or in air-conditioned spaces. If the heat index exceeds 90 degrees Fahrenheit, it is proposed that all employees should be allowed a 15-minute break every two hours, and managers would be required to monitor their workers for symptoms of heat-related illnesses. Measures would also have to be implemented to allow for the “acclimatization” of employees who are either new or returning to work after illness, including more frequent breaks and a reduced workload until they are back up to speed. “The purpose of this rule is to significantly reduce the number of worker-related deaths, injuries and illnesses suffered by workers who are exposed to excessive heat simply by doing their jobs,” a senior administration official told reporters. If finalized after a period of public debate, the rule would be the first such rule in the United States at the federal level.
Employee wins right (and $40,000) not to cut off his dreadlocks
A man who describes himself as a ‘spiritualist Rastafarian’ has won $40,000 after successfully claiming that he was discriminated against in a job application when he was told he would need to cut his hair to work at a grocery store. At his job interview, for an assistant manager position at Hometown IGA’s Williamsburg store, the claimant was told he would have to remove his dreadlocks if he wanted the position. He explained that he wore the dreadlocks for religious reasons and that he would not cut them. The store, owned by Kentucky-based grocer Houchens Food Group, lost its case, after it was deemed that it failed to consider an accommodation for the plaintiff and denied him employment. Religious dress and grooming practices are one of many protected areas under Title VII’s prohibition of religious discrimination, according to 2014 EEOC guidance. The document specifically lists Rastafarian dreadlocks as an example of such practices. “An employer’s personal appearance policy does not change its obligation to try to accommodate the religious beliefs of its employees and applicants,” said Kenneth L. Bird, a regional attorney for the EEOC. “This case is an important reminder that Title VII protects all sincerely held religious beliefs and applicants and employees alike.”
Menopause stigma impeding women’s career growth, finds report
Absent workplace accommodations for women experiencing the menopause is causing a detrimental impact to both their wellbeing, but also their careers, according to the findings of the annual Bonafide ‘State of Menopause’ report. According to the research – which polled more than 2,000 US working women – more than three-quarters (76%) of respondents said no workplace accommodations were afforded to them for the menopauses. In this year’s survey, just over half of women (51%) said they want increased workplace accommodations. The report found that because perimenopause – also called the menopausal transition – usually begins between the ages of 45 and 55, it often overlaps with the pinnacle of a woman’s career. The data found nearly one in two women polled (49%), said menopause had impacted their job performance. This was found to be worse amongst women under 50, where 76% of those polled said their job performance has suffered. Nearly half of all respondents (48%) said they believe women experiencing menopause are seen to be less productive or emotionally stable in the workplace. And in addition to fielding workplace discrimination such as ageism, misogyny, and wage gaps, more than two in five women (42%) said menopause symptoms have inhibited their career ambitions.
New ruling could reduce federal agency authority in interpreting legislation
A Supreme Court decision [Loper Bright Enterprises et al. v. Raimondo], could substantially impact federal agency determinations in interpreting statutes where legislation may be ambiguous or subject to interpretation. By overturning the long-standing ‘Chevron Doctrine’ precedent – where judicial deference should be afforded to federal agency determinations – the Supreme Court has effectively said courts are best positioned to interpret whether government agencies have statutory authority when the agency’s actions extend beyond the language of the legislative provisions, even in agency-specific areas. Commentators argue the change could now represent a significant reduction in the authority granted to federal agencies in interpreting and implementing legislation. Recently, agencies have been accused of over-stepping their powers, and so this ruling adds to this narrative. For instance, the end of last month saw a decision by the US District Court (USDC) for the Eastern District of Texas, blocking the US Department of Labor’s overtime rule from taking effect for Texas state government employees. Last week a decision by the USDC for the Northern District of Texas also found that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) lacked authority to issue binding regulations governing “unfair methods of competition” related to the proposed ban of non-compete agreements. Current US government regulations remain in effect unless and until challenged and overturned in the Federal Courts.
Government contractor must pay $1m for failing to accommodate deaf workers
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has ruled that Didlake, a non-profit nonprofit government contractor that specifically employs people with disabilities, must pay more than $1m for failing to accommodate its own workers who are either deaf or hard of hearing. The contractor, which provides janitorial and maintenance employees to federal worksites throughout Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia, has been ordered to pay $1,017,500 for failing to provide communications accommodations, including American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters, for deaf and hard-of-hearing employees. During the hearing, it was also revealed that the company maintained a policy of terminating employees who requested medical leave but did not qualify for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). In addition to monetary relief, Didlake to been told to update its existing leave and reasonable accommodations policies, provide training to its management on the ADA and educate all employees on how to request reasonable accommodations. “This litigation is an important reminder that employers must provide effective accommodations to employees who are deaf and hard of hearing,” said Debra M. Lawrence, regional attorney in the EEOC’s Philadelphia office. The EEOC filed the suit after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its administrative conciliation process.
John Deere announces layoffs
Much-anticipated job losses at agricultural machinery company, John Deere, have finally been announced, after the business revealed it would make headcount cuts of 600 people across three facilities in the US. In a statement, John Deere said the cuts are due to reduced demand for the products made by the factories in Illinois and Iowa. These products include harvesting equipment and construction and forestry equipment respectively. “To better position Deere to meet future demand, we continue to take proactive steps to reduce production and inventory,” it said. However, the company has come under fire for cutting jobs whilst at the same time reportedly shifting production to a new facility in Ramos, Mexico. One worker, who spoke to The Guardian newspaper said: “We [now] get wind of more layoffs daily, it seems, and it’s causing uncertainty all over. The only reason for Deere to do this is greed.” in 2023, John Deere reported a profit of more than $10billion, and its CEO John May earned $26.7million in total compensation. Since then, however, the company has reported a drop in revenue and forecasted a 2024 income of $7billion. It cited higher production costs, lower shipment volumes, and volatile weather that contributed to a lack of customer demand. Said another worker: “[For] a lot of these communities, like mine in Ottumwa, losing John Deere would be an extremely big loss. It’s a town of 28,000, and the only other manufacturing is a pork processing facility, so it doesn’t leave a lot of options for jobs.”
Employers added 206,000 jobs in June
In what some claim to be a continued show of resilience, US employers added more than 200,000 new jobs in June. Despite falling short of May’s 218,000 number, many suggest the official June numbers once again showcase the US economy’s ability to withstand high interest rates. However, other experts have given the data a more muted response, pointing to the fact that most of the job gains (two-thirds in fact), come from healthcare and social assistance, neither of which – they claim – capture the economy’s underlying strength. Economists have also noted that job growth from April through June averaged 177,000 – a decent figure, but still the lowest three-month average since January 2021. Meanwhile, unemployment has now also ticked up slightly again – up to 4.1%, from 4.0%. Average hourly pay rose just by 0.3% from May and 3.9% from June 2023. The year-over-year figure was the smallest such rise since June 2021. Commenting on the figures, Eric Winograd, US economist at AllianceBernstein said: “Both May and June hiring was above 200,000 even after revisions, and the trajectory looks stable.” He added: “The best available evidence is that the labor market remains strong and that any deceleration remains modest.” Economists have been repeatedly predicting that the job market would lose momentum in the face of the high rates engineered by the Fed, only to see the hiring gains show continued strength.