A 2007 lawsuit that accused Bloomberg L.P. of routinely discriminating against pregnant women and mothers was dismissed by a judge in Manhattan. The U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska said that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) failed to provide sufficient evidence that Bloomberg engaged in a “pattern or practice” of discrimination.

The lawsuit alleged that Bloomberg reduced pay for pregnant women or women who recently returned from maternity leave; demoted them; excluded them from management or subjected them to stereotypes about female caregivers in violation of U.S. law.

While allowing some individual claims to proceed in the case, the judge rejected the EEOC’s claim based on a lack of statistical evidence of discrimination. “Here, much of the evidence appears to be the EEOC’s claims that individuals were unhappy with the amount of a rise or unhappy with a denial of a transfer or unhappy about not receiving a promotion,” she said.

Further, the judge acknowledged that individuals who spend more time away from work will face more challenges in terms of advancing, especially in a “company like Bloomberg, which explicitly makes all-out dedication its expectation.” Essentially, the decision to make family a priority over work comes with consequences for anyone—not just pregnant women and mothers.

A Bloomberg spokesman said that the ruling confirms what the company has known all along: that the evidence would be on the company’s side and that the case is without merit.

Many employees like the idea of telecommuting. Avoiding the crowded freeway sounds like a great idea. Gas prices are high, so commuting can eat into a paycheck. And keeping an eye on the kids while getting a daily to-do list accomplished is a winning combination for parents who work from home (in their pajamas?).

But is telecommuting as productive as working in the office? Employees say so. In fact, 86% said they were even more productive during telecommuting, according to a recent survey of telecommuting employees by Staples, the office supply retailer.

In addition, 76% of employees who are allowed to avoid the daily commute to the office (an average 75-mile round trip among those surveyed) said they are more willing to work extra hours and feel greater loyalty to the company.

What more could telecommuting employees want? A better chair. Nearly half said they need a more comfortable chair and that clutter in their home office affects their productivity. Of course, since Staples was conducting the survey, this finding is not all that surprising.

Other interesting tidbits from the employee telecommuting survey:

• Telecommuters are succeeding on their own, not because of support from their employers. 87% said their company supplied no furniture and about 60% said they received no equipment or supplies from their employers.
• Employees who telecommute report they eat healthier and are less stressed. The average reported drop in stress level was 25%.
• 80% of telecommuters say they have a better work/life balance.
• To stay in touch with the office, 96% of telecommuters say they rely on email, while 68% use instant messaging and 44% videoconferencing.
• 40% of respondents said they’d rather take a pay cut than stop telecommuting.

Believe it or not, your employees might be blaming you—or your company, or their jobs—for the problems they’re having at home. And what’s more, when they feel that work or the boss is a burden in their lives, it could cause big problems.

It’s important that employers care about what or whom their employees blame when they have family problems. The associated anger and frustration often leads to negative workplace behaviors, such as missed work, low productivity and employee theft.

Instead of being hit with a problem you never saw coming, try being more proactive with your employees’ workplace satisfaction. Here are a few tips to get you started, which could pay off in a big way!

Schedule in advance: Last-minute meetings and must-attend work events cause stress for families, especially when schedules are already so tight. Encourage everyone to put in for vacation time far in advance so planning is easier on spouses and partners. Try to avoid last-minute meetings and don’t require employees to attend every single work-related event.

Listen and empathize: Create a company culture that cares. If an employee is having trouble balancing work and family obligations, don’t disregard them or the importance of finding a solution. Employees who feel heard and understood will appreciate and remember it—and may even be more inclined to volunteer for extra duty when they can. In any event, they’re likely to be more productive and happier on the job.

Don’t discriminate: Whatever you do, don’t assume that only women have family needs to attend to. Just as many men blame work issues for family conflicts, and employees of both genders want to attend their kids’ softball games, school plays and ballet recitals. Be mindful that employees who are not parents have other obligations, too. Don’t expect them to always be available or to pick up the slack when parents run out the door to make it home in time for homework help. Be respectful of all employees and the unique family needs they each have.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects people with disabilities against job discrimination. Employers, including private companies, state and local governments, labor organizations and labor management committees may not discriminate in recruitment, pay, hiring and firing, promotions, training, leave, benefits, job assignments and all other employment-related activities.

Protection covers all aspects of work, including applying for a job, working conditions and benefits. Employers with 15 or more employees are also required to provide reasonable accommodation for employees with disabilities, unless it would cause undue hardship.

What is Reasonable Accommodation?
A reasonable accommodation is a modification or adjustment to a job, the work environment or the work method to enable an individual with a disability to enjoy the same employment opportunity, including equal benefits and privileges, as employees without disabilities.

Examples include:

• Posting information about jobs in places that are accessible to everyone, in ways that visually and other impaired individuals may use them
• Making facilities accessible
• Job restructuring
• Part-time or flexible work schedules
• Acquiring new or modify existing equipment
• Changing training materials and placement tests
• Providing readers or interpreters

Does a Small Company Need to Install Elevators?
Not if it creates an undue hardship. Larger companies’ facilities typically accommodate wheelchairs in restrooms, elevators, workspaces and common areas. However, a small company may not be financially able to install an elevator for a worker with a disability. It’s possible to make other arrangements to accommodate the worker, such as creating a workspace on the ground floor and finding new meeting spaces that work for everyone.

Employers may also have to accommodate time for doctors’ appointments, if an employee’s disability is related to an illness that requires medical treatment. Keeping the lines of communication open from the start will go a long way in preventing resentment from other staff, who may view time off as special treatment. Collaborating on how to handle special requests is important for long-term success.

Remember, employers may not ask disability-related questions on job applications or before an offer of employment is made. However, they may evaluate whether an applicant is qualified for the job, including asking about his or her ability to perform specific job functions, asking about non-medical qualifications, and asking applicants to describe or demonstrate how they would perform tasks.

See more answers to your questions about employers and the ADA here: http://www.ada.gov/qandaeng.htm.

Most employers have a typical hiring process of advertising a position, weeding out applications, conducting interviews and hiring the best-fit candidate. However, there are extra steps in the process that you may be overlooking that could help your company hire better-quality employees, and even reduce your turnover.

Screening applicant resumes: While the number of applicants for a given position may affect resume review, there are some standard procedures you can implement to help make the best choice:

• First, make a list of your must-have and can-live-without qualities for your new hire. Is following the instructions for applying for the position absolutely critical? If you asked for a cover letter and an otherwise-standout resume is missing it, will it be tossed?
• Next, to avoid reading every word on every resume, determine what keywords best describe the employee you need to hire, and then scan resumes for those words.
• Be sure to apply the same parameters and requirements to every applicant.

Start conducting phone interviews: The purpose of a phone interview is to be certain a candidate understands the job description and requirements, and that the salary range aligns with their expectations. If it’s not a good fit for either side, going further is a waste of time.

Phone interviews are also a good way to determine if the candidate has the communication skills necessary for the position. If they’re applying for a customer service job, but cannot establish a good rapport over the phone, they will probably not be successful.

First-round interviews are typically the next step, for applicants who pass the initial screening and do well on the phone interview. Expect to spend 45 minutes to an hour with each candidate; if the interview is not going well and needs to be cut short, you may have a problem with your process up to this point. If the candidate is not a good fit or not qualified for the job, the resume screening and phone interview should have revealed this.

Follow up after the interview: Be polite—it can pay off! The frustration of job seekers can be exacerbated when they don’t hear anything after an interview. It’s just as important to make a good impression on potential employees as it is for them to make a good impression on you. Once you’ve eliminated a candidate from contention sure to send a brief email thanking him or her for their time and informing them that another candidate was selected.

Why is this so important? You never know what can happen, whether your first choice candidate declines the job offer, or you decide you’ve made a hiring mistake a month in. Plus, it’s all about your company’s brand—do you want to be known as a professional and polite firm or the onethat leaves people hanging? Developing good relationships with everyone who comes in contact with your company is a great way to spread goodwill.

Make the decision: When it’s time to choose the applicant who will join your company as an employee, look for enthusiasm and culture fit. If a candidate has the same basic skills as four other applicants, but is pumped up about coming to work and excelling, you probably have a winner. Before making the hire offer, be sure to conduct a pre-employment screening to ensure that the candidate’s credit and criminal history are clean. Keep your other employees and your company safe from potential harm with pre-employment background checks.

In a case that will result in significant changes to laws covering employee benefits, the Supreme Court this week ruled in Amara v. Cigna. The case was brought on behalf of 25,000 Cigna employees who disagreed with the company’s handling of changes in its pension plan back in 1998. The employees claimed that the company misled them that a new plan, which actually froze pensions of older, retired workers was “an overall improvement in retirement benefits.”

The Supreme Court ruled that a lower court could award the employees the benefit Cigna led them to believe they had coming. Viewing the ruling as a victory for employees, the assistant secretary of labor at the U.S. Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration, which filed a brief on behalf of the Cigna employees, said the court’s decision “goes a long way toward restoring…common fairness.”

Analysts say employers scored a win, too. In the same case, the court agreed with Cigna that when there are conflicts between documents employers give to employees (“summary document”), and those not seen by the employees (“plan document”), employees do not have grounds to sue to enforce the terms of the summary document.

The lower court had ruled that Cigna deliberately provided misleading information to employees and successfully concealed the pension freeze, depriving employees from taking action, such as protesting or seeking employment elsewhere. Cigna argued that employees were legally entitled only to the less-generous benefits described in the formal plan document, which they did not see. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote, “It is not difficult to imagine how the failure to provide proper summary information, in violation of the statute, injured employees.”

Cigna employees could receive an estimated $70 million in pension benefits.

Ahead of tomorrow’s Bureau of Labor Statistics April jobs report, private staffing firm ADP released their National Employment Report for April, which indicates that U.S employment continues to improve—but slowly. Employers added 179,000 jobs in April, bringing total employment to a level 1.35% above April 2010.

While April’s figure was down from 207,000 added jobs in March, and lower than the increase of 198,000 predicted by the Bloomberg survey, it appears that the bottom has been reached, and the trend is toward recovery. Small to mid-sized service providers are growing the most jobs, adding 138,000 in April, while goods-producing jobs remain stagnant with just 41,000 additional jobs.

But are employers themselves the reason for slow job recovery? Are they holding off on filling open positions? Some studies seem to indicate exactly that. Employers are not cutting jobs at the same rates they did in 2010, but they’re not in any hurry to fill job openings. According to the Conference Board, a research organization, the number of job openings advertised online has grown to 4.2 million, continuing a trend that began in the spring of 2009.

4.2 million jobs waiting to be filled, and only 179,000 jobs added in April? The problem seems to be a hesitation on the part of employers to commit to hiring. Recruiters say it takes longer to find qualified candidates, and even longer to get them hired. Hiring cycles that used to last two months are now stretching into six or even eight months.

One recruiter said that hiring managers are not only taking longer to hire; they are holding out for better candidates. Companies are bringing in between five and six candidates for second-round interviews—twice as many as in 2007. And once they identify the perfect hire, they start over. The thinking is that if there is one great candidate, there must be 10 more even better.

The frustrations for job seekers must be incredible. Plenty of companies have good jobs open and ready to fill, but they are taking 180 days instead of the 60 to make a commitment. They want each hire to be the perfect hire. And when there are plenty of candidates to choose from, what’s the hurry?

A recent survey of 1,400 workers by a Philadelphia management firm reported that 84 percent of respondents said they plan to seek a new job in 2011. What would happen if you surveyed your employees? Would the number be that high? And if they all resigned, how would your company look after the exodus?

Employers know that finding and keeping great employees is one of the toughest aspects of running a business. It takes a great deal of resources—both time and money—to hire a new employee, and there are no guarantees that a new hire will stick around long enough for the company to recoup its investment.

The tough economy has added to employee dissatisfaction. Working conditions at many companies have been difficult, with fewer employees doing the same amount of work. Benefits and hours have been cut, too, leaving plenty of people ready to jump ship as soon as hiring starts up again.

What can an employer do to keep a good employee from jumping ship? And how can one avoid a surprise batch of turnovers?

Listen and observe your staff. Do you see general apathy? A lack of enthusiasm for new tasks? Are people coming in late and leaving early? Your employees may be trying to tell you that all is not well.

Try moving people around to different positions. Cross training can perk up and employee, make their job more interesting and keep him or her from looking for a new job.

Engage your staff more often. If you need fresh ideas on how to improve sales, cut costs or increase customer satisfaction, hold a brainstorming session to get everyone’s input. Who knows your business and customers better than your staff? Asking for their help builds value.

Remember that keeping a good employee longer starts with recruitment. Hire for a great attitude and provide tools a new employee needs to succeed. And don’t overlook the importance of pre-employment screening. It’s the best way to know that you’re hiring a qualified and trustworthy employee and building a strong team.

Now that March Madness is over, some business owners are reconsidering their policies on the activity surrounding the tournament in the workplace. The innocent office basketball pool can become a dangerous game. And if money is changing hands, it could be even more so–because gambling is not legal everywhere!

A recent survey by CareerBuider indicated that 20 percent of workers have participated in March Madness pools at work. Other reports mention the billions of dollars in lost productivity to business that the March Madness Tournament “inspires.” Maybe your employees are included in those 20 percent and you see a loss in productivity. And maybe you’re fine with that. On the other hand, maybe your office has a more formal atmosphere and you prefer to keep it that way.

So what should your answer be when your employees come to you and ask for permission to start a March Madness office pool next year? Here are some points to consider:

• Will it harm your company to have a once-a-year office pool? If the only thing in the way is you, maybe it’s time to rethink your reasons for saying, “no.”
• Can trust your staff to keep the party to a minimum and still get the job done?
• Avoid online activity, as online betting laws can easily be broken.
• As the business owner, it might be a good idea for you to avoid any involvement in the pool.
• Think about the boost in morale that a March Madness pool could create. Sometimes, hard-working teams need a way to blow off steam and just enjoy their co-workers and the time they spend at work.
• Focus on the amount of work your staff is producing—not necessarily the amount of time they’re spending on their tasks.
• Remember, it’s been a tough couple of years, and your employees might just need a fun break.

Your employees are your most important resource. Think carefully before you take away their March Madness pool!

One woman posted a photo of herself on vacation, holding a glass of wine. Another posted negative remarks about a supervisor. Others discussed their work environment on a private MySpace page.

What do these employees have in common? They were all fired, dismissed or forced to resign over these activities.

Is it okay to terminate an employee for their online actions? What about postings that are harmful to a company, its reputation, a supervisor, or co-worker? Where do employers draw the line when it comes to employees’ online behavior?

The new rules have not yet been sorted out. As some firms scramble to create social media policies, others are hands-off when it comes to how employees spend their free time.

A Social Media Policy Can Help
Cover the Content: We’ve all seen photos of company picnics that look like drunken free-for-alls. Prohibiting the posting of photos from company-sponsored events anywhere but on the official website, after approval by a content manager, is one way to establish control.

Reinforce that employees do not have free reign when it comes to badmouthing their employer or co-workers, on or off the job. Not only is it in bad form, it’s can be grounds for dismissal. Employers can be held responsible for what employees say or post; therefore, they have the right to limit it.

Establish boundaries. How does a view inside a co-worker or boss’s private life affect employee relations? What about knowing a staff member’s religious or political views? When does a “friend request” become creepy and harassing behavior? Decide whether or not it is permissible for a boss to friend a subordinate.

Realize you probably cannot establish broad policies such as prohibiting employees from referring to the company in any way on any social media site.