News & Knowledge

Arbitration Clauses in Employment Agreements:  Keeping Them Enforceable  By:  Malissa Wilson Mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts reduce the possibility that legal action will be taken against employers.  Wrongful termination, wage and discrimination claims can all be resolved in a private process before a disinterested third person, rather than publicly in court before twelve jurors. While enforceable, arbitration clauses in employment agreements must still comply with basic principles of contract formation.  For instance, an employee can still raise misrepresentation, mistake, and undue influence as defenses to the enforcement of an employment agreement containing an arbitration clause.  In drafting arbitration clauses, it is important that the language is written in a way that is not confusing (use of terms that are vague or not commonly understood) or hard to read (font size is too small).  It is also important that the clause is fair by not placing more of the cost to arbitrate on the employee or placing unreasonable limitations on damages or the proceedings themselves. The arbitration clause should name the arbitration organization, such as the American Arbitration Association, where the claim will be filed and whose rules will be followed. When presenting an arbitration clause to potential and current employees, human resource personnel should go over the clause with the employee; answer any questions an employee may have; and, not rush or pressure the employee into signing the agreement.  Last, the agreement must be signed indicating an understanding that the employee is waiving the right to pursue employment-related claims […]

Malissa Wilson and Spencer Ritchie were speakers at the Mini Law School for HR Professionals seminar, held July 31, 2019, in Pearl, Mississippi.

In a recent decision, the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door for employees to bypass filing a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) before filing suit.  The Court unanimously decided, in Fort Bend County v. Davis, that Title VII’s charge-filing requirement is procedural and not jurisdictional. By making this finding, the Court for the first time made clear that federal courts have the authority to hear Title VII claims that are not the subject of a Charge of Discrimination, and that the charge-filing requirement could be waived by employers for failure to timely assert it as a defense.

Malissa Wilson and Spencer Ritchie will be speakers at the upcoming Mini Law School for HR Professionals seminar.  This is a basic level seminar that will examine the current issues in human resource law for attorneys, Human Resources and financial professionals, and other business executives.  Malissa and Spencer would love for you to join them!

Malissa Wilson and Spencer Ritchie were speakers at the Human Resource Law from A to Z seminar, held March 27-28, 2019, in Pearl, Mississippi. The basic-to-intermediate level seminar provided a comprehensive overview of current issues in human resource law for attorneys, Human Resource and financial professionals, and other business executives.  Wilson and Ritchie spoke about discrimination and harassment; workplace behavioral issues; workplace privacy and employee monitoring; and, disciplining and firing employees. Click here to learn more about FormanWatkins’ Labor & Employment practice.

The seasons have changed from Winter to Spring, but the EEOC’s position regarding wellness incentives remains the same. This year’s stalemate over employee wellness programs has increasingly caused employers to ask: have wellness incentives become more trouble than they are worth? In a dramatic shift from its former endorsement of wellness incentives, the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) has invalidated the incentive provisions of its wellness program regulations. The result: since January 1, 2019, when the EEOC regulations became ineffective, employers have been in limbo when it comes to implementing their employee wellness programs, with no guidance from the EEOC to speak of.

Malissa Wilson and Spencer Ritchie will be speakers at the Human Resource Law from A to Z seminar.  This seminar is basic-to-intermediate level and will examine current issues in human resource law for attorneys, HR personnel, accountants, and presidents and vice presidents.  Malissa and Spencer would love for you to join them!

Click the image below to read about the experience and accomplishments of our Labor & Employment Practice Group, or download a PDF:

Summertime brings summer vacations and holidays.  However, for employers, it can also bring a pattern of Friday and Monday absenteeism by employees on intermittent leave under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or, perhaps in these instances, better referred to as the “Friday Monday Leave Act.”  Understandably, this pattern may raise the suspicion of an employer who questions the validity of the absence, but feels there is no recourse for fear of violating the FMLA.  However, employers, have no fear, there are ways to address the matter without running afoul of the FMLA.

On July 10, 2018, Forman Watkins attorneys, McCann LeFeve and Patrice Pujol, obtained a favorable decision for a Fortune 50 company and Firm client from a Beaumont judge in a workers’ compensation contested case hearing. The claimant sought both medical and indemnity benefits, alleging he was injured while walking on a stairway leading to the facility’s entrance. After extensive cross examination of the claimant and highlighting the many inconsistencies in his testimony, the judge ruled in our client’s favor, held the claimant did not sustain a compensable injury, did not have a disability resulting from the claimed injury, and denied the claim in its entirety.