The importance of preaching (and training) calmness in the workplace

Until today, I had never heard the phrase, "gratuity riot." I bet you hadn't either.

It allegedly happened in Nashville, where a bartender, pushed past her limit by a bachelor party that ran up a large tab and left no tip, hurled a pitcher across the bar. Words were exchanged, bottles followed, and soon the bar was a scene out of a country-western apocalypse — stools overturned, beer spraying, a shattered glass everywhere.

By the time the police arrived, the bartender was under arrest for aggravated assault, inciting a riot, and destruction of property.

We can all shake our heads and mutter, "What a mess," but there's a real workplace lesson buried under the spilled beer and broken glass.

The 11th nominee for The Worst Employer of 2025 is … The Enslaving Episcopate

Every year I think I've hit rock bottom when it comes to my "Worst Employer" list. And every year, someone picks up a jackhammer and starts digging.

Let me introduce you to the Kingdom of God Global Church, led by "Apostle" David Taylor and his "executive director" Michelle Brannon.

According to federal prosecutors, these two masterminded what can only be described as a modern-day slave labor scheme wrapped in the trappings of religion. The FBI's August raid of Brannon's mansion revealed 57 victims of forced labor living in cramped, squalid quarters — while Brannon enjoyed seven Mercedes, two Bentleys, half a million dollars in gold bars, and a backyard full of marble statues.

A reminder from the DOL that not all “front-of-house” jobs are created equal

The Department of Labor just released a new Wage & Hour opinion letter on one of those topics that always makes restaurant and hospitality employers nervous — tip pooling under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The question is whether "front-of-house" oyster shuckers can be included in a tip pool with servers when the employer takes a tip credit toward minimum wage?

The DOL says yes — if those shuckers actually interact with customers.

WIRTW #775: the 'kindness' edition

What's wrong with kindness?

When I was a kid, I was taught: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

I disagree. Words can wound. They can demean. They can normalize cruelty and strip people of dignity. That's not strength, but weakness dressed up as bravado.

This week I was reminded of the choice we face every day in how we use our words. In a series of since-deleted comments to my LinkedIn post about the illegality of calling Black employees "monkeys," someone proudly declared:

➡️ that calling others "monkeys" is just free speech,
➡️ that he can call "whoever he wants a monkey,"
➡️ and that anyone who challenges that is undermining his freedom.

Technically, he's right: the First Amendment protects his right to say it. But here's the important part: free speech is not free of consequences, nor is it free of responsibility.

Which brings me back to my question: what's wrong with kindness?

Kindness invites connection.
Kindness builds trust.
Kindness strengthens communities and workplaces.
Kindness takes less effort than cruelty.
Kindness is the simpler, stronger choice.

Cruelty may get you attention, but kindness earns you respect.

So maybe the real question isn't "What am I free to say?" but "How will my words define me?" and "What impact will my words have on the people who hear them?"

None of us should want to be remembered for the insults we hurled, but for the kindness we offered.

The same is true at work. Cultures built on cruelty don't last. They burn people out, drive away talent, and create environments where fear replaces trust.

On the other hand, cultures built on kindness endure. They attract people who want to contribute, they foster collaboration, and they create workplaces where employees feel valued and respected. Kindness isn't just a moral choice, it's the smart business strategy that sustains organizations.

Choose kindness. Always.

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

Religious "purity tests" are a Title VII accommodation no-no

"Are you really that religious?" is the wrong question for any employer to ask of an employee seeking a religious accommodation.

The 6th Circuit just handed down a decision in Bilyeu v. UT-Battelle that should serve as a warning to any employer tempted to test the "sincerity" of an employee’s religious belief.

Let's count the ways Pete Hegseth's speech would get your company sued

If Pete Hegseth were your CEO, I'd be drafting your EEOC position statement tomorrow.

You're not running the Department of War (née Defense), and your employees aren't soldiers. If you think, however, Hegseth's speech yesterday is a model for shaping culture in your workplace, here's a lawyer's caution: his words are an employment-law nightmare.

The 10th nominee for The Worst Employer of 2025 is … The Corpse-Concealing Taskmaster

On Sunday, September 21, 43-year-old UPS driver Shelma Reyna Guerrero was crushed to death inside a cargo trailer at a company facility. According to police, she was loading packages alone when a malfunctioning conveyor caused an avalanche of parcels to fall on her. A co-worker discovered her injured body, but by the time emergency responders arrived, she was already gone.

Her coworkers remembered her as warm, kind, and joyful: "She was so friendly, had a beautiful smile … it was so infectious."

UPS compounded the heartbreak of this preventable death with its response. Workers report that the company shut operations down for only two hours before restarting both shifts — while Shelma's body was still in the building. Some employees said management even covered her body with "sort bags" so coworkers wouldn't have to see the body bag encasing her remains.

Monkey see; monkey not do

Chalk one up to common-sense — the 6th Circuit just held that the word "monkey," when directed at a Black employee, constitutes a racially hostile work environment.

In Smith & Sneed v. P.A.M. Transport, the court reversed summary judgment for the employer and sent the case to trial.

WIRTW #774: the 'daughter' edition

Yesterday was National Daughters Day, not to be confused with National Transfer Money to Your Daughter's Account Day (Oct. 6), International Daughters' Day (Sept. 28), Father-Daughter Day (Oct. 12), or National Son and Daughter Day (also Sept. 28).

I happen to host a podcast with my daughter — The Norah and Dad Show. We just released our 55th episode, covering our recent visit during Parents Weekend at her university. We discuss: dining, shopping, soccer, and an absolutely awful homecoming football game, the difference between "speech pathology" and "speech therapy," the meaning of community service, and why I canceled our Hulu subscription.

Here's a quick clip to whet your appetite.

You'll find the full episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Amazon Music, Overcast, on our website, or through your favorite podcast app. And if you enjoy it, please like, review, and subscribe—it really helps us grow!

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

The 9th nominee for The Worst Employer of 2025 is … The Malignant Museum

De'Mario Grant thought he'd landed his dream job in security at the de Young Museum, following his grandfather's footsteps. Instead, he got backbreaking 16-hour shifts, chronic pain, HR doubting his medical leave, and managers whispering behind his back. He sued and won, and yet management kept right on retaliating against him until they finally fired him.

What does a $100,000 H-1B visa fee mean for American businesses?

Donald Trump's recent Proclamation raises the fee for foreign nationals seeking entry into the U.S. on an H-1B to $100,000. 

[T]he entry into the United States of aliens as nonimmigrants to perform services in a specialty occupation under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA ... is restricted, except for those aliens whose petitions are accompanied or supplemented by a payment of $100,000.

This restriction lasts at least 12 months, with only narrow "national interest" exceptions.

WIRTW #773: the 'free speech' edition

"Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation, must begin by subduing the Freeness of Speech; a Thing terrible to Publick Traytors."

— Benjamin Franklin, The New-England Courant, July 9, 1722.

"If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable."
— U.S. Supreme Court, Texas v. Johnson (1989).

"The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed — would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper — the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed for ever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you."
— George Orwell, 1984.

"Free speech is neither a privilege nor a partisan luxury. It's the oxygen of democracy. Without it, elections are hollow, dissent is branded illegitimate, or worse, and truth becomes whatever those in power decree. History shows that silencing speech is both the path by which authoritarians rise and the tool by which they endure."
— Jon Hyman, September 18, 2025.

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

Documentation + Process + Conduct = the three things you need to best bulletproof your termination decisions

How do you fireproof your workplace decisions from discrimination lawsuits? By doing exactly what Kent State University just did.

A transgender professor sued after being denied a leadership role and campus transfer, claiming sex discrimination. On appeal, the 6th Circuit affirmed the summary dismissal of the case, because the employer had its ducks in a row.

Here's what happened, and why the university won.

Outrage mobs shouldn't run your HR department. Employers need process, not panic, when the internet comes calling.

Outrage mobs shouldn't run your HR department. Yet Vice President JD Vance is urging the outrage mobs on. "When you see someone celebrating Charlie's murder, call them out and call their employer." That was his closing call to action as guest host of Charlie Kirk's podcast yesterday.

Plenty didn't need the nudge. Within 24 hours of Kirk's killing, employers nationwide—from media outlets to universities, airlines to retailers—were disciplining or firing staff over posts deemed "insensitive" or "celebratory" of his death.

A cottage industry of doxxing quickly formed. A site originally branded Expose Charlie's Murderers (since rebranded Charlie Kirk Data Foundation for obvious legal reasons) began cataloging names, employers, and posts. Activists like Laura Loomer pledged to ruin careers.

When does the workday begin and end for a remote worker?

With the rise of remote work, wage and hour laws have forced employers to grapple with what should be a straightforward question: When does a remote employee's workday actually begin and end?

In Lott v. Recker Consulting, the Southern District of Ohio offered a clear answer.

Kiara Lott and 130 of her fellow Patient Care Associates worked from home as call-center reps. Their day started with the familiar remote routine: coffee, logging in, Duo security, VPN, ADP timekeeping, Microsoft Teams, and then opening the phone system and workflow tools to handle patient calls.

They sued under the FLSA, claiming they weren't paid for the minutes spent booting up, logging in, authenticating, and later shutting down. The employer countered that all of that was non-compensable "preliminary" or "postliminary" time.

WIRTW #772: the 'drooly zerberts' edition

On this week's episode of The Norah and Dad Show, I check in with Norah as she kicks off her sophomore year of college. We talk about her experiences pledging a sorority, balancing two jobs, navigating classes, and how the dorm food is holding up.

It's a fun conversation about growth, responsibility, and finding your footing in year two of college life.

Below is a quick clip to whet your appetite.

You can listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, Amazon Music, Overcast, on our website, or through your favorite podcast app. And if you enjoy it, please like, review, and subscribe—it really helps us grow!

---

Here's what I read this week that you should read, too.

'Come on you Gunners!' as pretext for discrimination?

My family are Gooners. For the uninitiated, that means we're Arsenal Football Club supporters. My 17-year-old son is the most passionate of the lot.

On a recent layover in an airport lounge, Donovan was wearing his Arsenal kit when a man walked by, pointed at the crest, and with a British accent said: "Oy, you got some dirt on your chest."

It took Donovan a minute to process. And then, barely missing a beat, he got up, walked over to the man, and asked, "Are you a Spurs fan?" ("Spurs," short for Tottenham Hotspur, Arsenal's North London neighbor and most despised rival.)

The man replied, "I am."

To which Donovan, at the top of his lungs, yelled: "PISS OFF!"

Then he turned and walked back to our table, leaving the man chuckling with his family.

Can we still trust the EEOC to enforce our anti-discrimination laws?

The EEOC exists to combat workplace discrimination. Employers depend on it for guidance, employees depend on it for protection, and its credibility is what makes civil rights law meaningful in the workplace.

That's why the recent allegations against the agency itself are so concerning.

Marc Seawright, a transgender man and the EEOC's former Director of Information Governance and Strategy, alleges in his recently filed EEOC charge that the agency instructed him to scrub every mention of LGBTQ+ identities from its outreach materials. The agency created these materials to help employers understand their obligations under Title VII as defined by the Supreme Court in the Bostock case. According to Seawright, his expertise is now being "leveraged to perpetuate discrimination against people like me."

SCOTUS just green-lit racial profiling. This is bad. Really, really bad.

The Supreme Court just gave ICE the constitutional thumbs-up to profile people based on race, national origin, language, job, or where they happen to be.

A lower court had blocked ICE from detaining people by relying on appearance, accent, or occupation as a proxy for immigration status. On appeal, the Supreme Court, through a shadow-docket order, lifted that injunction. In plain English, ICE can once again use these factors to decide whom to stop, question, and detain.

What would you do if ICE showed up at your door?

Last Thursday, nearly 500 federal, state, and local officers descended on Hyundai's under-construction EV battery plant. By the end of the day, 475 workers—most of them Korean nationals—were in custody.

The raid was massive: roadblocks, a boat fishing people out of a sewage pond, workers hiding in air ducts. Agents asked every worker for identifying information before clearing some to leave and detaining the rest. It was the largest single-site enforcement action in Homeland Security history.

Hyundai has said that some arrested were not its direct employees but contractors or subcontractors. Still, construction of the $5.5 billion facility is now halted. South Korea dispatched diplomats. Lawsuits will almost certainly follow.