For those in New York, here is the link to the New York State Department of Labor's information on child labor law.

Now there are no excuses for making mistakes when hiring minors this summer.

More than occasionally I am questioned by individuals regarding severance and layoff issues and I was recently quoted in the technology job board, Dice and also eFinancial Careers on individual options when negotiating severance.

There is a slew of other information out there from attorneys who represent individuals, including, for example, the Ottinger Firm right here in New York, which has a recent post on The Top Five Questions and Answers About Layoff and  Severance.  Since so many of us have been or know someone who has recently been or is about to be laid off, a little bit of knowledge may go a long way.

According to recent news articles on the events in Binghamton, the accused gunman had recently been laid off from his job and felt that others had made fun of his poor English.  Hindsight being 20-20, it is sometime useful and helpful to reflect on events, no matter how horrific, to see what can be learned from them.

1.  Begin using the new form today.

Revised I-9 - April, 2009

2.  Download a copy of the new manual for employers to make sure your internal process remain in compliance and be sure to review the discussion of approved documents on page 43.  The manual contains information on:

How to complete the form
Completing form I-9 .5
Photocopying and retaining the form
Instructions for recruiters and referrers for a fee
E-Verify
Acceptable documents for verifying employment authorization and identity

Handbook for Employers - Employment Eligibility Verification

Needless to say, in a nanosecond, the tweet was all over the web, including being read by staff at Cisco.  The result - not good.  In addition to watching a great job disappear in such a rotten economy, the candidate now had become the subject of this website - www.ciscofatty.com - which almost brought down godaddy's servers - obviously created by someone with a rather mean streak with way too much time on his or her hands.

For more from MSNBC: Twitter gets you fired in 140 characters or less

There are four new notices available:

1.     General Notice (Full version) – Send this notice to ALL qualified beneficiaries going forward. This combines a general COBRA notice with the premium reduction provisions of ARRA

2.     Abbreviated Version of the General Notice – This notice covers just the premium reduction information under ARRA – Send this notice to individuals who experienced a qualifying event during on or after September 1, 2008, have already elected COBRA coverage, and still have it.

3.     Alternative Notice – This notice is sent to persons who became eligible for continuation coverage under a State law. Plans will need to modify notice to bring it into compliance with state law.

4.     Notice in Connection with Extended Election Periods – This is the notice that everyone has been waiting for. It includes information on ARRA’s special election opportunity along with the premium reduction information. This notice MUST be provided to these individuals by April 18, 2009. Plans subject to the Federal COBRA provisions MUST send this notice any “assistance eligible individual” who:

a.     Had a qualifying event at any time from September 1, 2008 through February 16, 2009; and,

b.     Either did not elect COBRA continuation coverage, or who elected it but subsequently discontinued COBRA.

REMEMBER:  You will still have to edit these forms for your own use.  Follow the instructions or seek professional help!  

Follow this link to the Department of Labor's Page containing the new notices.

US Department of Labor Model COBRA Notices Under ARRA

GINA, which was signed into law last May, prohibits discrimination by health insurers and employers based on genetic information. Title II of GINA (the subject of the proposed regulations), prohibits the use of genetic information in employment, prohibits the intentional acquisition of genetic information about applicants and employees, and imposes strict confidentiality requirements.

Some Basics About GINA:

Title I amends portions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal Revenue Code, addresses the use of genetic information in health insurance.

Title II prohibits the use of genetic information in employment, prohibits the intentional acquisition of genetic information about applicants and employees, and imposes strict confidentiality requirements.

Title II applies to private and state and local government employers with 15 or more employees, employment agencies, labor unions, joint labor-management training programs, Congress and federal executive branch agencies.

What is “genetic information?”

Genetic information includes, “information about an individual’s genetic tests, genetic tests of a family member, and family medical history.” It does not include “information about the sex or age of an individual or the individual’s family members, or information that an individual currently has a disease or disorder.”

Prohibited Employment Practices:

Generally, GINA prohibits the use of genetic information in connection with any terms or conditions of employment. In addition, employers cannot intentionally acquire information and imposes additional confidentiality requirements with respect to genetic information. GINA's confidentiality provisions impose similar requirements on genetic information as that required under the Americans With Disabilities Act. With regard to remedies, The same remedies available under Title VII are available under GINA.

Follow These Links to:

EEOC Proposed Regulations Under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act 
of 2008
Questions and Answers on the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008

In the midst of the current economic crisis and the flurry of employment law activity under the new administration, it's easy to forget the first word of this blog. The whole purpose of the name Strategic HR Lawyer was intended to focus not only on employment law but also elements of strategic human resources management. I began my career in HR over two decades ago and even after I became an attorney, it has influenced my practice, how I approach problems and advise on legal issues.

Here's my beef for today. For the last several months I've heard all about the economy, and all about these new laws. In fact, many of my recent posts have focused on attempting to keep my readers up to date on the numerous legislative changes. Today, I am putting my HR hat on and plan on putting it on more regularly on this blog. Why? Because, quite frankly, if HR professionals spend their time becoming junior lawyers and abdicate their leadership opportunities by letting bean counters lead the company's charge through these tough economic times, then guess what? HR will have lost its opportunity to emerge as transformational leaders in organizations and the profession will reaffirm the negative stereotypes that are periodically thrust upon it.

The Compensation Force Blog (by World at Work) had a recent post on the estimates for 2009 salary increases. The post cites a recent Watson-Wyatt survey on the Effect of he Economic Crisis on HR Programs which, in part demonstrates that projected compensation budget increases for this year are still in flux. That notwithstanding, how many of us have heard about wage frees for this year? To me, wage freezes are about the same a hiring freezes – shortsighted and usually the decisions of narrow minded people (unless company is in a true crisis). Both of these approaches do nothing to engage the workforce, promote productivity and retain loyal and motivated employees for the long haul.

So here's my wild idea for today: Instead of letting the bean counters implement wage freezes or cuts, why don't we adopt what I'll call the “REVERSE MERIT PROGRAM” - If we can, and have been for years, dole out salary increases based on a performance management system that gives the best raises to the star performers and the lowest or no raises to the poorest performers, then why don't we use that same system for salary cuts? In other words, freeze the salaries of the best performers and dole out salary "cut backs" to employees based on performance measurements. Isn't compensation supposed to be an "investment" in our people?  So you can cut your salaries will STILL “reward” your top performers. Now, I know that the critics are saying that companies have already slashed to the bone and there are no “poor” performers left. To that I say, baloney. If nothing else, we should not stop thinking about the opportunity as HR professionals to make a positive difference in the lives of people who work at our organizations and design programs that promote the achievement of organizational objectives – despite how difficult economic conditions are.

So what's your idea?

The new amount is intended to be equivalent to the amount previously available for parking and is intended to be indexed in 2010. 

See the following - page 13 - for a brief summary of the subsidy.  THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009 – FEBRUARY 12, 2009 - FULL SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS FROM SENATE FINANCE, HOUSE WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEES

So for those of us responsible for human resources policies, make sure yours addresses driving with cell phones and complying with state and local laws.

Now, I am far from perfect, but my initial advice to my clients was this:  CHILL!  Within 72 hours of President Obama signing the Act, I had read a dozen conflicting fact sheets from seemingly well intentioned advisors.  Why CHILL?  Let's face it.  Everyone is in the exact same boat.  The USDOL and the IRS were slated to issue guidance shortly after the the law was signed.  Many of the provisions of the subsidy were administratively impossible (hmmm, a negative tax liability on a 941?).

So, guess what?  The IRS and the DOL have both issued guidance regarding the subsidy.  Here are the links:

US Department of Labor - COBRA under the ARRA - it took me a while to find this one buried on the DOL website.  Remember, this is the same website that suggests "Osama" when you search for President Obama......

US Department of Labor COBRA Premium Subsidy Fact Sheet

Revised Form 941 - The IRS says it's effective January 2009 - Cute.

IRS Form 941 Guidance Containing COBRA Subsidy Instructions Under ARRA - Yep, the form says it's effective January '09, but nicely buried on page 6, you will find instructions regarding the COBRA subsidy that went into effect, ummmm, February.

IRS Website Information on COBRA Premium Subsidy Under ARRA

So what's the point of all of my cynicism?  The message here is to start with the guidance issued by the DOL and the IRS, be very wary of what you read that is meant to be guidance from others.  It could be wrong and it's not necessarily in others' best interest to admit to you that they were wrong.

• Employers must provide 90 days’ notice prior to a plant closing, mass layoff or relocation occurring on or after February 1, 2009.
• Notice must be provided to affected employees and their representatives, the New York Department of Labor and the local workforce investment board at least 90 days before the event.
• For employers planning layoffs shortly after the new law takes effect, notice would have to be provided prior to the law’s effective date to meet the 90-day requirement.
• The state WARN Act applies to private employers with 50 or more workers who layoff at least 25 employees.

Many who have reviewed the statute would argue that from a drafting perspective, it leaves a great deal to be desired!  Thus, in order to clarify a whole host of ambiguities and inconsistencies the New York State Department of Labor issued an emergency rule, opened a comment period and is slated to issue regulations under the new statute.

Here is a link to the actual statute that confused many of us:

New York WARN Act Statute

Here are a few helpful links providing some clarification:

New York State Department of Labor "WARN" Page

New York WARN Act Regulations

Summary of Proposed Rule

• Across all employee categories, industries and regions, employers plan to lower their 2009 salary budget increase projections by 0.8 percentage points.
• Average salary budget increases this year will be 3.1% compared to 3.9% when data was first collected in April 2008.
• 77% of the workforce can still expect to receive base pay raises.
• Metropolitan areas with the largest projected salary budget increases of 3.1% are: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.
• Half of participating organizations (51%) made changes to their 2009 projected salary budget increases, with more than 90% of those making changes lowering their salary budget increases by an average of 1.6%.
• For exempt salaried employees, 10% of participating organizations will be freezing pay in 2009.
• For organizations reducing salary budget increases, 19% to 33% are cutting salary increase budgets to zero.

Ouch.  For more information regarding the survey:

Three Out of Four U.S. Employees Can Expect a Raise in 2009