<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace V5 Site Server v5.13.156 (http://www.squarespace.com) on Mon, 20 May 2013 04:28:27 GMT--><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0"><channel><title>All in a Day's Work</title><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/</link><description>Labor &amp; Employment Law Blog</description><lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 14:15:11 +0000</lastBuildDate><copyright></copyright><language>en-US</language><generator>Squarespace V5 Site Server v5.13.156 (http://www.squarespace.com)</generator><item><title>April’s Workers’ Compensation Appellate Division Decisions</title><category>Appeal</category><category>Workers Compensation</category><category>Workers Compensation Board</category><dc:creator>Elizabeth Connellan Smith</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 14:05:11 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/5/9/aprils-workers-compensation-appellate-division-decisions.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:33622360</guid><description><![CDATA[<span class="full-image-float-left ssNonEditable"><span><img src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/bsmithcandid.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1368108879916" alt="" /></span></span>On April 3 and April 30, 2013, the Workers&rsquo; Compensation Board Appellate Division issued two more decisions on cases taken to the intermediate level of appeal: <em>Haskell v. Katahdin Paper Co., Inc.</em> and <em>Thew v. Saunders of Lock Mills, LLC</em>.&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /><br /><strong><em>Haskell v. Katahdin Paper Co., Inc.<br /></em></strong><br />Issues of interest that the Appellate Division addressed in the first case, <em>Haskell v. Katahdin Paper Co., Inc.,</em> Decision no.13-3 include the effective date of the amendment creating the Appellate Division and with it, the intermediate level of appeal; examination of the process of applying the Act to a pre-existing condition; and a re-examination of the &ldquo;arising out of&rdquo; standard in a <em>Bryant v. Masters Machine Co. </em>situation setting.<br /><br />Mr. Haskell had longstanding, non-symptomatic degenerative disc disease in his cervical spine.&nbsp; On the date in question, Mr. Haskell was standing with a 300 pound pump suspended at chest level from a chain attached to an electric powered hoist that maneuvered the pump using a crane.&nbsp; He had his left arm at the controls of the hoist, and his right arm resting on the chain.&nbsp; He heard a sudden loud bang from the mezzanine level above him, where others were working, and jerked his head to the right and looked up.&nbsp; He experienced immediate pain in his neck, with radiation into his right arm and numbness and tingling down to his fingers.<br />]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-33622360.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>MSBA Labor &amp; Employment Law Section Host Maine Human Rights Commission at the Spring Luncheon</title><category>Commission</category><category>Individual Liability</category><category>Mediation</category><category>Whistleblower</category><dc:creator>Elizabeth Connellan Smith</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 13:10:31 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/4/23/msba-labor-employment-law-section-host-maine-human-rights-co.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:33424689</guid><description><![CDATA[<p><span class="full-image-float-left ssNonEditable"><span><img src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/bsmithcandid.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1366722828555" alt="" /></span></span>The Maine Bar Association&rsquo;s Labor &amp; Employment Law Section hosted the principal decision-makers from the Maine Human Rights Commission at a luncheon held in Augusta on April 11. Executive Director Amy Sneirson, Counsel John Gause, Chief Compliance Officer Jill Duson and Chief Investigator Barb Lelli dined and interacted with an engaged group of the Section&rsquo;s members.</p>
<p>While the whole luncheon was both educational and enjoyable, perhaps the most thought-provoking moment of the event came at the end, when Attorney Gause concluded the session by letting everyone know that he had just put out a <a href="http://www.maine.gov/mhrc/guidance/memo/20130411_g.pdf" target="_blank">memorandum</a> on Individual Supervisor Liability in Maine in light of the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Fuhrmann</span> decision.&nbsp;The Law Court, in <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Fuhrmann v. Staples Office Superstore East, Inc.</span>, 2012 ME 135, 58 A.3d 1083, held that individuals are not &ldquo;employers&rdquo; within the meaning of that term under either the Maine Human Rights Act or the Whistleblower Protection Act. Nonetheless, it is Attorney Gause&rsquo;s opinion, and therefore the position the Commission will take, that individuals may still be held liable for employment discrimination on other grounds, including interference claims, age discrimination in hiring, abetting, aiding, inciting, compelling or coercing claims and, most critically, retaliation claims. To read Attorney Gause&rsquo;s thoughts, click on the link, above.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-33424689.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Maine Employers and the "Take Your Gun to Work" Law</title><category>Employee Handbook</category><category>Maine Legislature</category><category>weapons policy</category><dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 09 Apr 2013 14:42:11 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/4/9/maine-employers-and-the-take-your-gun-to-work-law.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:33272874</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Currently, under Maine law employers may not prohibit an employee who has a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm from keeping a firearm in his or her vehicle, as long as the vehicle is locked and the firearm is not visible.&nbsp;The law, however, does not permit an employee to carry a firearm in a place where carrying a firearm is prohibited by law.&nbsp;The law does include an immunity provision that protects the employer from any liability that may result from a civil action arising out of another person&rsquo;s actions involving the firearm transported or stored under the law.<br />&nbsp;&nbsp; <br />This immunity from liability, however, does nothing to assist an employer who, for policy reasons or otherwise, prefers that no weapons of any sort be brought on company property.&nbsp;LD265, sponsored by Senator Gerzofsky of Cumberland and entitled &ldquo;An Act to Repeal the Restriction on Employers Regarding Firearms Kept in an Employee&rsquo;s Vehicle&rdquo;, seeks as stated in its title, to repeal 26 M.R.S.A. &sect; 600, Maine&rsquo;s current bring your gun to work law.&nbsp;The Maine State Chamber of Commerce supports the bill. More information regarding the bill can be accessed on the Maine State Chamber of Commerce&rsquo;s <a href="http://www.mainechamber.org/mx/hm.asp?id=ChamberMinute" target="_blank">webpage</a>.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-33272874.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Complimentary Seminar/Webinar - Plugging the Brain Drain: Strategies to Manage Your Skilled Labor Force</title><category>Seminar</category><category>Skilled Labor</category><category>Webinar</category><dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:45:12 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/4/4/complimentary-seminarwebinar-plugging-the-brain-drain-strate.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:33240113</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Whether it is a mechanic, an engineer, or an artist, access to a skilled workforce is an essential component to most businesses. Yet the most common way to recruit skilled labor, directly from the source, is wrought with problems. Formal trade schools, if they even exist, have trouble keeping up with the demand. Competitors sometimes snatch up the best candidates before they even graduate. Even if you can find qualified candidates you are still taking a chance by hiring an unknown person and Tentrusting them with a critical element of your business. This month&rsquo;s seminar focuses on two novel solutions to this problem: Growing your own skilled workforce from internal candidates, and 2) Avoiding the problem altogether by hiring third party contractors.&nbsp; Join Labor Group Attorneys <a href="http://www.verrilldana.com/bford/">Benjamin Ford</a> and <a href="http://www.verrilldana.com/talvarez/">Tawny Alvarez</a> as they discuss legal strategies to help businesses manage their skilled labor workforce. Complimentary light breakfast will be provided for seminar attendees.</p>
<table style="width: 504px; height: 122px; font-size: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width: 155px;">&nbsp;<span class="full-image-block ssNonEditable"><img style="width: 150px;" src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/Ford_B_TN.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1365166662437" alt="" />&nbsp;</span>&nbsp;</td>
<td valign="top">
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><span>Benjamin E. Ford</span></p>
<p><span>T: (207) 253-4828</span></p>
<p><span><a href="mailto:talvarez@verrilldana.com">bford@verrilldana.com</a></span></p>
</td>
<td style="width: 155px;">&nbsp;<span class="full-image-block  ssNonEditable"><img style="width: 150px;" src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/T_Alvarez.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1365166662437" alt="" />&nbsp;</span>&nbsp;</td>
<td valign="top">
<p><span>&nbsp;</span></p>
<p><span>Tawny L. Alvarez</span></p>
<p><span>T: (207) 253-4522</span></p>
<p><span><a href="mailto:talvarez@verrilldana.com">talvarez@verrilldana.com</a></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><a href="http://www.verrilldana.com/events/xpqEventSearch.aspx?xpST=EventSearch">Click here to register for this event.</a></p>
<div></div>
<div></div>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-33240113.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Newly Minted Appellate Division Issues First Two Decisions</title><category>Workers Compensation</category><category>Workers Compensation Board</category><dc:creator>Elizabeth Connellan Smith</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:36:45 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/4/1/newly-minted-appellate-division-issues-first-two-decisions.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:33178557</guid><description><![CDATA[<p><span class="full-image-float-left ssNonEditable"><span><img src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/bsmithcandid.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1364831041989" alt="" /></span></span>The first two decisions have issued from the Workers&rsquo; Compensation Appellate Division this week, offering employers a first glimpse of a review process last seen prior to the reforms of 1992.</p>
<p>On March 25th a panel made up of Hearing Officer Collier, Hearing Officer Elwin and Hearing Officer Greene heard an appeal brought by an employer, Point Sebago, alleging that Hearing Officer Jerome had erred as a matter of law in determining the employee&rsquo;s Average Weekly Wage according to 39-A M.R.S.A. &sect;102(4)( B). Point Sebago argued that the wage should have been determined with reference to &sect;102(4)(D), using comparable employee wages. The panel disagreed and upheld Hearing Officer Jerome&rsquo;s method and decision.&nbsp;</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-33178557.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Maine’s Three Seasons: Winter, August, and Hiring</title><category>Hiring</category><category>Seasonal Employment</category><category>Seminar</category><dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2013 19:13:14 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/3/22/maines-three-seasons-winter-august-and-hiring.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:33096362</guid><description><![CDATA[<p>Does your company hire a seasonal work-force?&nbsp; Are you in the process of gearing up for an influx in advertising and hiring for summer help?&nbsp; Have you registered for Verrill Dana&rsquo;s free upcoming Seminar/Webinar Maine&rsquo;s Three Seasons: Winter, August, and Hiring?&nbsp; If you answered no to this last question, what are you waiting for?&nbsp; Verrill Dana&rsquo;s Labor and Employment team invites you to participate in this upcoming event that will be filled with helpful insights and tips for all employers who deal with a seasonal workforce.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/pdf-files/Seasonal%20Hiring%20Seminar%20Invitation.pdf">Click here&nbsp;to access&nbsp;more information and links to register for this seminar</a>.</p>]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-33096362.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Effective Immediately: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Revises Employment Eligibility Verification for I-9</title><category>Form I-9</category><category>Hiring</category><dc:creator>Douglas Currier</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 18:44:08 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/3/15/effective-immediately-us-citizenship-and-immigration-service.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:33049393</guid><description><![CDATA[<span class="full-image-float-left ssNonEditable"><span><img src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/Courier_Doug_04.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1363373491412" alt="" /></span></span>Effective March 8, 2013, all employers who hire employees in the U.S. are required to use a revised Form I-9.&nbsp; In a March 7, 2013 <a href="http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=bc6e41f935a4d310VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&amp;vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD" target="_blank">Press Release</a>, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services announced employers should begin using the newly revised Form I-9 for all new hires and reverifications immediately.&nbsp; The previous I-9 forms, most recently revised August 7, 2009, may be used until May 7, 2013, however, after May 7, 2013, employers must only use the newly revised Form I-9.&nbsp; Failure to use the revised I-9 Form after May 7, 2013, will result in employers being subject to all applicable penalties under section 274A of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a.<br />]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-33049393.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Yahoo, Work-From-Home, Attendance, and Essential Functions</title><category>Attendance</category><category>Essential Functions</category><category>Job Descriptions</category><category>Telecommuting</category><category>Work-From-Home</category><category>Yahoo</category><dc:creator>Douglas Currier</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2013 15:15:14 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/3/1/yahoo-work-from-home-attendance-and-essential-functions.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:32901666</guid><description><![CDATA[<span class="full-image-float-left ssNonEditable"><span><img src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/Courier_Doug_04.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1362151599987" alt="" /></span></span>At this year&rsquo;s Annual Employment Law Update we discussed and reiterated the importance of maintaining up-to-date job descriptions.&nbsp; In updating position descriptions, the Verrill Dana Labor and Employment team reminded attendees of the importance of including the essential functions of each position in job descriptions in order to insulate employers from successful failure to accommodate claims.&nbsp; Yahoo&rsquo;s Monday announcement that all employees currently working off-site will be required to be physically present in a Yahoo office by June is arguably a mandate that an essential function of all Yahoo employee&rsquo;s jobs is physical attendance.<br />]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-32901666.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Whistle While You Work: Whistleblower Complaints under the Affordable Care Act</title><category>Affordable Care Act</category><category>FLSA</category><category>OSHA</category><category>Retaliation</category><category>Whistleblower</category><dc:creator>Tawny Alvarez</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 20:23:35 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/2/27/whistle-while-you-work-whistleblower-complaints-under-the-af.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:32881637</guid><description><![CDATA[<span class="full-image-float-left ssNonEditable"><span><img src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/T_Alvarez.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1361996851006" alt="" /></span></span>Today, February 27, 2013, the Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration&rsquo;s (OSHA&rsquo;s) <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-27/pdf/2013-04329.pdf" target="_blank">Interim Final Report</a> on Procedures for the Handling of Retaliation Complaints Under Section 1558 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) became effective. The report governs the whistleblower provision of the ACA which provides protections to employees of health insurance issuers, or other public or private employers, who are retaliated against for reporting potential violations of the ACA&rsquo;s consumer protections or affordability assistance provisions.<br />]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-32881637.xml</wfw:commentRss></item><item><title>Have You Rung In the New Year with Your New FCRA Forms?</title><category>Adverse Action</category><category>Background Check</category><category>CFPB</category><category>Credit Reporting Agency</category><category>FCRA</category><category>FTC</category><category>Notice</category><dc:creator>Tawny Alvarez</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:15:57 +0000</pubDate><link>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/2013/2/20/have-you-rung-in-the-new-year-with-your-new-fcra-forms.html</link><guid isPermaLink="false">1066935:12321351:32844792</guid><description><![CDATA[<span class="full-image-float-left ssNonEditable"><span><img src="http://www.hrlawupdate.com/storage/T_Alvarez.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1361370034235" alt="" /></span></span>While the new year is off to a swinging start, the team at Verrill Dana wants to make sure all clients are complying with the Consumer Financial Protection Board&rsquo;s (CFPB) requirement that updated Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) notices be used when performing background screenings on current or potential employees.&nbsp; Previously, the CFPB issued regulations that called for the modification of three critical forms required by the FCRA, 15 U.S.C.&sect; 1681 et. seq.&nbsp; As of January 1, 2013, these modified forms, issued in final form by the CFPB in November 2012, are now the required notices under the FCRA. <br />]]></description><wfw:commentRss>http://www.hrlawupdate.com/home/rss-comments-entry-32844792.xml</wfw:commentRss></item></channel></rss>