<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Word</title>
	<atom:link href="http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword</link>
	<description>A blog about legal issues affecting the workplace</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:29:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Independence Day</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/03/independence-day-2/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/03/independence-day-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:29:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[C-Suite]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Employee Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Leadership Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Other Resources]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last year on Independence Day, I posted the Declaration of Independence. I think it&#8217;s appropriate to review once a year one of the most important documents produced by our forbears or by any group of people in history. Since Independence Day, 2009, falls on a Saturday, I&#8217;m doing my Independence Day post a day early.

I would invite [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/03/independence-day-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sotomayor&#8217;s Second Circuit ERISA Cases</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/sotomayors-second-circuit-decisions-on-erisa/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/sotomayors-second-circuit-decisions-on-erisa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:28:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[C-Suite]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Documentation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Federal Legislation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[In the Courts]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Leadership Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Politics &amp; HR]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Sonia Sotomayor]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[The Word In-Depth]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[benefits]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[ERISA]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Second Circuit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7416</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Five of the Second Circuit opinions authored by Judge Sonia Sotomayor deal with the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). ERISA cases aren&#8217;t considered as sexy as a lot of employment law cases, but the number of such cases is growing. The U.S. Supreme Court is occasionally asked to consider a case filed under this complicated statute. Getting a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/sotomayors-second-circuit-decisions-on-erisa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Time to End Discrimination Assumptions?</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/time-to-end-discrimination-assumptions/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/time-to-end-discrimination-assumptions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:03:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[C-Suite]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Discrimination]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Hiring]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Diversity]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Leadership Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Supervisor's Corner]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Talent Management]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7729</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This post could be a follow-up to my analysis of the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in Ricci v. DeStefano. Its genesis is, rather, a recent article in the New York Times about a meeting attended primarily by female playwrights to hear the results of a year-long research project on gender bias in the playwriting business. Female authors [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/time-to-end-discrimination-assumptions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>While On Hold</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/while-on-hold/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/while-on-hold/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:20:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[HR Humor]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[YouTube]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7568</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What do employees at all levels do when they&#8217;re on the phone and are put on hold? A variety of things, no doubt. As this video clip demonstrates, sometimes you need to close the door to your office, and sometimes you need to lock it.


]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/02/while-on-hold/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sotomayor&#8217;s Second Circuit Decisions on Privacy and Workplace Searches</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/sotomayors-second-circuit-decisions-on-privacy-and-workplace-searches/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/sotomayors-second-circuit-decisions-on-privacy-and-workplace-searches/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[C-Suite]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Discipline]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Documentation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Handbook Policies]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[In the Courts]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Leadership Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Politics &amp; HR]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Sonia Sotomayor]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[The Word In-Depth]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[employee privacy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Second Circuit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7475</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Employee privacy is a hot button issue generally. Privacy in the workplace is also growing in importance: monitoring email, searching employee property, taping conversations, videotaping certain locations of the workplace, and surveilling employees during work hours and while off duty. (See post on recent Supreme Court decision.) Judge Sonia Sotomayor authored one opinion in this area. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/sotomayors-second-circuit-decisions-on-privacy-and-workplace-searches/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Implications of Supreme Court&#8217;s Strip Search Case for Employers</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/implications-of-supreme-courts-strip-search-case-for-employers/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/implications-of-supreme-courts-strip-search-case-for-employers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 14:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[C-Suite]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Discipline]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Documentation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Handbook Policies]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[In the Courts]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Leadership Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Supervisor's Corner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7749</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a previous post, I called attention to a case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court about the legality of a strip search of a student at school. What the Court decides in such a case can always have implications for workplace privacy issues and employer search policies. The Court has now decided Safford Unified School District #1 v. Redding.

In this case, a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/implications-of-supreme-courts-strip-search-case-for-employers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Truman on Statesman vs. Politician</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/truman-on-statesman-vs-politician/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/truman-on-statesman-vs-politician/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Quotes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There will be some who say that the day of the statesman has long past. I don&#8217;t know if I&#8217;m that pessimistic about it, but something Harry Truman said provides some humor for the subject and may actually solve the debate about statesmen vs. politicians.

&#8220;A statesman is a politician who&#8217;s been dead 10 or 15 years.&#8221;
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/07/01/truman-on-statesman-vs-politician/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Impact of Supreme Court&#8217;s Ricci Decision on Sotomayor&#8217;s Possible Confirmation</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/impact-of-supreme-courts-ricci-decision-on-sotomayors-possible-confirmation/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/impact-of-supreme-courts-ricci-decision-on-sotomayors-possible-confirmation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:49:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[C-Suite]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Discrimination]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Diversity]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Federal Legislation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[In the Courts]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Leadership Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Politics &amp; HR]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Sonia Sotomayor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7798</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Ricci v. DeStefano. in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has said Judge Sotomayor was wrong to conclude that white firefighters hadn&#8217;t been discriminated against because of their race when the City of New Haven denied them promotions. What timing!

With Sotomayor&#8217;s confirmation hearings two weeks away, the Supreme Court&#8217;s decision will be the source [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/impact-of-supreme-courts-ricci-decision-on-sotomayors-possible-confirmation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court Rules for White Firefighters in Discrimination Case</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/supreme-court-rules-for-white-firefighters-in-discrimination-case/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/supreme-court-rules-for-white-firefighters-in-discrimination-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[C-Suite]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Discrimination]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Danger Zone: Documentation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Diversity]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Federal Legislation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[In the Courts]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Leadership Communications]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Politics &amp; HR]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Sonia Sotomayor]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[The Word In-Depth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7772</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As noted in two previous posts, the U.S. Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in Ricci v. DeStefano would be important because of its potential to change the way discrimination cases are evaluated under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and because Judge Sonia Sotomayor was one of three judges who issued the decision being reviewed by [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/supreme-court-rules-for-white-firefighters-in-discrimination-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Meetings = Big Drunk</title>
		<link>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/meetings-big-drunk/</link>
		<comments>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/meetings-big-drunk/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:56:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Phillips</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Cartoons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/?p=7462</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The above title may be a bit of an overstatement, but Cultural Offering provides us a cartoon that&#8217;s right on target.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://employmentlawpost.com/theword/2009/06/30/meetings-big-drunk/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
