Workplace discrimination is usually a distressing occurrence for those exposed to it, particularly if the discrimination is followed up by retaliation against those who speak out or take action to stop it. One of the big questions these employees have is: how can I hold my employer accountable for allowing discrimination to occur?
In our previous post, we looked briefly at the importance of carefully approaching the negotiation of executive compensation. For employees, this is important to ensure fair compensation and appropriate job security, while for business, there is both the need to attract and retain high quality employees, and the need to balance financial limitations and manage risks.
Fair compensation is a high priority for anybody, in any profession. It is especially important for those employed in executive positions that require a high-level of expertise, time commitment, and personal responsibility. Those who are in a spot that allows them to consider employment offers for such positions understand the importance of negotiation, but may not know how to best approach to negotiating their own compensation agreements.
In our last post, we began discussing the topic of whistleblower protections. As we noted, these protections vary by statute and the scope of activity protected can vary somewhat depending on the jurisdiction.
Whistleblower protections are one of the ways government helps ensure businesses comply with state and federal laws and regulations. The protections available depend on the statute, but a general feature is that employees have protection from employer retaliation for reporting violations.
We’ve been exploring in recent posts the topic of non-compete agreements, and the limitations and requirements for their valid use here in Wisconsin. Last time, we began discussing the requirement that non-compete agreements be supported by consideration, which is a general requirement for any contract.
In our last couple posts, we’ve been looking at the topic of non-compete agreements, and specifically at some of the requirements of Wisconsin law when it comes to negotiating valid and enforceable non-compete agreements. As we noted last time, non-compete agreements must be reasonable with respect to duration and territory.
Disputes over employees' rights can tear a workplace apart. It's critical for both sides - employers and employees - to know what intrinsic rights workers hold. Many disputes and confrontations are avoided by simply understanding the law and how it impacts workplace relationships. These same laws can help solve disputes that have already arisen. While employee rights have grown fairly complex over the years, here are four of the most important ones.
Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett wrote an interesting op-ed that was recently published in the Journal Sentinel. The subject of the piece was an issue that is important for many businesses in Wisconsin: non-compete contracts. For businesses, of course, non-compete agreements are a way to protect proprietary business information from being appropriated by former employees for the benefit of a competitor. For employees, they can reduce the ability to find alternative work.
Previously, we began looking at the issue of workplace accommodations for employees with mental illnesses. As we pointed out, federal law requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for disabled persons, including those with mental illnesses.