"Susceptible
Startups - Employment Law: Cases against dot-com companies demonstrate
their vulnerability to labor issues"
by Richard S. Rosenberg and Douglas N. Silverstein
For most of the past decade, start-up and emerging
growth companies rode an unprecedented wave of expansion. Amidst
almost daily reports of newly minted "dot.com" millionaires,
traditional brick and mortar enterprises watched helplessly as thousands
of their employees traded in career paths and business suits for
khakis and a bucket full of stock options. Enthused by the prospect
of overnight riches and a casual work environment, a new 24/7 work
culture took hold. Not surprisingly, many of these companies didn't
see the need to be concerned with mundane matters like labor law
compliance. And, why should they? The thought of becoming the next
dot.comer to retire made new economy workers and managers alike
giddy with anticipation. Labor woes were the last thing on their
minds. Indeed, all was good in dot.com land, or so everyone thought.
With a recession now looming and tech stocks no longer
the darlings of Wall Street, there are thousands of harried and
overworked dot.comers with boatloads of worthless stock options
and busted dreams of instant riches. With daily reports of the next
dot.bomb, there is a disturbing undercurrent of labor unrest amongst
a workforce most people considered immune from such concerns. Just
last month, seven former and current Microsoft employees filed a
$5 Billion race discrimination class action. A few weeks earlier,
a Silicon Valley jury awarded a former Oracle employee $2.6 Million
on her wrongful termination and whistleblower claims against the
company. Reports of the recent unionization efforts of a group of
employees at etown.com and Amazon.com were the talk of Silicon Valley
and the rest of dot.com land.
Start-ups often have a very informal culture with
a younger workforce who have not been schooled in the many legal
requirements of workplace etiquette. At the helm of these companies,
one is apt to find an entrepreneur who has little or no experience
as an employer. The new CEOs often don't appreciate the value of
an HR department. The age of the workforce also tends to contribute
to labor law compliance problems. Whether you chalk it up to youthful
exuberance or just a lack of awareness, sex harassment, age and
other discrimination claims at dot.com companies are on the rise.
For example, few CEOs would intuit that the law requires them to
train managers and their subordinates about how to sue the company
for sexual harassment. Nor would they likely know that many of the
most common interview questions are illegal, or that disabled workers
have to be offered workplace accommodation.
Wage/hour law compliance is another fertile litigation
area. Cases can be brought on an individual or class wide basis.
Wage/hour laws require every worker be paid overtime premium pay
unless the employee meets the test for an exemption. The regulations
are written so that most employees are not exempt. The determining
factor is what the person actually does all day long. Simply working
with a computer or having the title containing the word engineer
or analyst is not nearly enough. Attorneys representing employees
are very motivated to file these claims because if they win, the
company is required to pay their attorneys' fees.
Companies must also become familiar with the array
of regulations which govern many routine personnel matters such
as hiring practices (which questions are legal and which are not),
pre-employment screening and testing, background checks, handling
time off requests (e.g., vacation, pregnancy leave, family leave,
sick leave, jury duty, military leave, substance abuse leave, workers
compensation and medical leave), job safety (every employer must
have a written illness and accident prevention plan), reimbursement
of employee travel and other expenses, affirmative action, and the
many requirements for managing physically and mentally challenged
job applicants and employees under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
The youth factor at the helm of so many new economy
companies makes age discrimination a common problem. Many of those
in management at the dot.com companies believe that older workers
are slower, tech phobic, inflexible and resistant to change. Employment
decisions affecting older (over 40) job applicants or employees
are illegal if they are made with these thoughts in mind.
Another common mistake is treating employees as independent
contractors. Most of these workers could never pass muster if their
independent contractor status was challenged. A written agreement
specifying independent contractor status is not determinative, or
even binding. Also, employees treated as contractors often assert
later on that they are employees when doing so is advantageous,
such as when they file to collect state unemployment or disability
insurance, or when they seek workers' compensation benefits following
a workplace injury. A recent Los Angeles Times article cites to
the sharp upswing in workers' compensation claims among dot.comers
who are suffering from carpal tunnel and other repetitive motion
injuries from heavy computer use. Workers under the age of 40 who
suffer from debilitating conditions are seeking to have the company
foot the bill for their medical care and rehabilitation. Also, non-compliance
with new federal and state ergonomics regulations will provide additional
claims and settlement costs to these already expensive cases.
Many new economy companies are reliant on third party
labor providers to supplement the workforce. There is a growing
body of law holding them jointly liable for the labor law violations
of the labor provider. Also, if the company hires temporary employees
who work alongside the company's regular workforce, there is a danger
that later on they may be treated as employees of the company for
tax and benefit purposes. Microsoft found this out the hard way
when they lost a major class action suit by a group of temporary
workers who the company had excluded from its benefit plans. Microsoft
just settled this suit for $97 Million.
Sexual harassment claims are another problem. With
so many young unattached people working long hours, consensual dating
is likely to occur. However, the line between acceptable behavior
and illegal unwanted advances is blurry, especially where a relationship
ends on a sour note. Companies and managers alike must understand
that they are personally liable, and the company strictly liable,
for a manager's sexual harassment. This is so even if the behavior
occurs off hours and away from work. Like wage/hour lawsuits, employees
who win a sexual harassment or other job bias case are entitled
to have the company pay their attorneys' fees.
The cooling economy gave labor organizers a leg up
at etown.com. Most observers thought new economy employees were
immune from unionization. etown.com has the distinction of being
the first internet company to face a real unionization effort. If
the union succeeds, it will pave the way for similar efforts among
the legions of disaffected dot.com workers. Two different unions
are reportedly attempting to organize Amazon.com's 5,000 customer
service representatives and distribution employees. There are complex
rules which companies have to know when dealing with union organizing
efforts. Most of the common reactions are outlawed as Unfair Labor
Practices under the federal labor law governing union management
relations.
Emerging businesses and start-ups who haven't made
the investment to set up a human resources infrastructure ought
to consider these well-publicized cases a wake-up call. There are
specific steps which companies can take now to position themselves
for the future, both in terms of litigation risk management and
improved labor relations. At a minimum, all major employment practices
and policies should be reduced to writing and reviewed by an employment
law specialist to assure legal compliance. Legally compliant policies
and procedures are also a must for any company seeking to purchase
employment practices liability insurance. An HR audit is also a
very good investment. In addition, managers must be trained on precisely
how they fit into the company's labor law compliance picture.
The recent spate of cases against dot.com companies
demonstrate that these companies are not immune to the kinds of
labor law claims which their brick and mortar counterparts routinely
face. Following the recent sharp downturn in the economy, some dot.com
and emerging business found out the hard way that there is a steep
price to pay for ignoring labor law compliance. As companies speed
down the information superhighway, the ones that are prepared to
meet these challenges head on are most likely to survive. |