Urine trouble: Ohio Supreme Court to decide whether an employer can require “direct observation” of a workplace urine-sample collection

An employer requires “direct observation” of its employees providing a urine sample pursuant to its reasonable suspicion and random workplace drug-testing policy. The employer sends an individual of the same sex to accompany the tested employee into a restroom designated for the sample collection to visually observe the employee producing the sample. The employer’s substance abuse policy and the consent and release form provide for the testing, neither discloses or provides for the direct observation of the sample production.

These are the facts of Lunsford v. Sterilite of Ohio, in which the Ohio Supreme Court will decide whether a private-sector, at-will employee who agrees to drug testing as a condition of continued employment has a reasonable expectation of privacy during mandatory drug screening.

Poll: how do you handle “Super Bowl Fever”?

Today is Super Bowl Monday, the day after the big game. The game ended after 10 pm last night, and parties went much later. In light of this, consider these stats from Kronos:

• An estimated 17.5 million U.S. employees say they may skip work today. 
• Of those employees, 11.1 million say they will likely use preapproved time-off.
• Another 4.7 million plan to call in sick even though they’re really not ill.
• 1.5 million say they will not tell anyone they’re not coming in and just won’t show up.
• 11.1 million employees plan to go to work, but will show up late.

So here’s my question for everyone. How will your business handle the “Super Bowl Fever”?

WIRTW #585 (the “demos” edition)

My daughter’s band, Fake ID, just recorded demos of a few of their original songs. Check them out on Soundcloud; they’d really appreciate it.


They will be performing some of these songs live at the Rock Hall tomorrow night for the first round of the Tri-C High School Rock Off. Fake ID is officially sold out of their ticket allotment (on behalf of the band, a big thank you to all who bought tickets), but they are still available through the Rock Hall’s box office, and will be sold at the door on the night of the event on a first-come-first-served basis. Cleveland.com calls the Rock Off “one of the most important — and best — musical events in Northeast Ohio.” Having attended in years past, I can vouch. It’s a fun night, with creative kids showing off their musical chops in a great venue (even if Norah’s not on stage).

Here’s what I read this week.

Does Title VII protect “veganism” as a religion?

A judge in the United Kingdom has ruled that “ethical veganism” is a protected class akin to religion and is protected from workplace discrimination. The Washington Post shares the details:

An employment tribunal made that landmark determination in a case involving a man who claimed he was fired from his job at an animal rights organization for revealing to colleagues that their pension funds were invested in companies that experiment on animals. The tribunal has yet to rule on the merits of the case, but it did on Friday take the step of deciding that the man’s ethical veganism constitutes a “philosophical and religious belief” protected by anti-discrimination law.

That’s the United Kingdom. What about the United States? Well, it depends.

Chipotle settlement highlights child labor issues

According to CNN, Chipotle has agreed to pay a $1.3 million fine for more than 13,000 child labor violations at over 50 of its Massachusetts restaurants. The state’s attorney general’s office accused the company of forcing teenagers to work without proper work permits, late into the night, and for too many hours per day and week. It’s the largest child labor penalty in Massachusetts history.

Ohio appellate court refuses to enforce employment arbitration agreement as “unconscionable”

An agreement between an employer and its employees requires an employee to submit to “final and binding arbitration … any actual or alleged claim or liability, regardless of its nature” (other than claims for unemployment or workers’ compensation, or for violations of the National Labor Relations Act).

An employee sues in court for race discrimination and retaliation, and the employer moves the court to compel the employee to arbitration his claims pursuant to their agreement.

Does the ADA protect employees who travel to areas that potentially expose them to coronavirus?

Coronavirus is 2020’s pandemic du jour. It’s a serious, and potentially deadly, respiratory virus that (likely) started in Wuhan, China, and has now made its way into the U.S. with five confirmed cases.

Suppose you fire an employee who you fear might have been exposed to the virus. She exhibits no symptoms, but because she had recently traveled to an area in which she could have been exposed, you think it’s better safe than sorry not to have her work for you anymore. She sues for disability discrimination, claiming that you “regarded her” as disabled. Does she win her case? The outcome might surprise you.