Employer

Bob Brown and Charles Corry, the "Employees" of XYZ Company sold commercial insurance to businesses. Prior to working with the company they had a written employment contracts which stated that “after the termination of their employment, for a period of 2 consecutive years they were not allowed to conduct business with any clients or customers of XYZ that were handled by the employees.” However, on October 18, 2007, the employees resigned and immediately began working for ABC Company Ltd. Since the

program? How do the employer sponsorship requirements, work protections, problems, and litigation trends, and other components of the programs compare? Short Answer The J-1 visa program is very unlike the H-2 visa program in design, oversight, and regulation. The J-1 visa program contains 15 different categories of participants, where some, such as secondary students, are generally not allowed to work. Furthermore, sponsor requirements for the J-1 visa program are not at the employer level, but a level

to help employers now if they are complying with federal laws and employees knowing if their benefit rights are protected. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), under the authority of laws passed throughout the twentieth century, administers the majority of regulations governing employee benefit plans. The website FAQ feature

society…" This quote from Robert Ellis Smith explains, in one sentence, the absolute need to ensure privacy in the workplace. One of the most interesting, yet controversial, areas concerning public personnel is employee privacy. What limits are there to employers’ intrusions into, and control over, employees’ behaviors and personal properties? There are five major areas which trigger privacy matters in the area of public sector employment: background

BACKGROUND: The Department of Labor has issued new guidance on differentiating between employees and independent contractors. ISSUE: Issue #1: How does the new DOL guidance change the way in which employers classify employees and independent contractors? CONCLUSION: Issue #1: The DOL has now rejected the common law control test utilized by the IRS and adopted the economic realities test, saying that most workers are considered employees under the FLSA’s broad definition. APPLICABLE LAW: The

effective for most of the employers and employees covered by the act. The FMLA is designed to help employees balance their work and family responsibilities by allowing them to take reasonable unpaid leave for certain family and medical reasons, including serious health conditions that prevent the employee from working. Not only has the FMLA evolved over the years, but also the current application in the workplace environment is very complex for the employee as well as the employer.      Over the years

of the company. Companies have a right to test employees for drugs. Employers may require new employees to submit to drug testing or they might ask for random testing. If employers are randomly selecting employees to submit to drug testing and not singling out certain employees, then they are using fair practices. All employees are being treated the same. Employers pay the employee to perform their duties. Therefore, employers have the right to ensure that employees are capable of handling their

Strike and Lockout are totally different actions. “A strike is based on the workers refusing to work in an effort to accomplish financial and personal gains from their employers”. In most developed countries, strikes are always initiated by Unions who are an organized group of workers who collectively use their strength to have a voice in their workplace. Strikes are purposely held since workers have the right to impact their wages, working hours, benefits, workplace health, safety issues, job training

The employment at will doctrine is such that, an employer can terminate an employee, at any time and for any cause, or no cause at all. Employment at will employees do not have an agreement and surety of continued employment, which is an issue of employee rights. There are several employee's right issues at workplaces; among which, one of the biggest issue of employees is their uncertainty towards their length of work employment. This leads to a lack of job security and an unsafe, and an unfair working

EAT demonstrates, that a worker is designated to deliver a claim against his current employer claiming that s/he had experienced a detriment for whistleblowing, even though s/he was not an employee of the employer at the time when s/he made the protected disclosure. The EAT takes a prudent approach, asserting that the Employment Rights Act 1996 is competent of this analysis. Detriment of disclosure to ex-employer In the case of BP Plc v Elstone and Anor E worked as a senior operations manager for