Connecticut Employment Law Blog Insight on Labor & Employment Developments for Connecticut Businesses

Tag Archives: applicant

Former Lawmaker (and Ex-Felon) Urges Connecticut To Ban Discrimination Against Felons in 2013

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Legislative Developments

At a Sentencing Commssion hearing last week, former state lawmaker Ernie Newton — who was convicted in 2006 on corruption charges — urged commission members to address hiring discrimination against ex-felons, reports CT News Junkie.  There is no indication yet that they will do so, but his comments raised some eyebrows in the press. Newton’s… Continue Reading

Senate Passes Bill Banning Use of Credit Reports by Employers With Exceptions

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Legislative Developments

UPDATED June 9, 2011 – The House approved the measure late last night, June 8th. For additional details, see this updated post. In the closing hours of the General Assembly’s term, the Connecticut Senate has passed a bill yesterday that would ban the use of credit reports by employers in many situations. Senate Bill 361… Continue Reading

Subjective Belief That You Are “More Qualified” Than Other Caucasian Applicants Not Enough to Support Race Discrimination Claim, Court Rules

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Litigation

While some matters get all the headlines, the work of the state and federal courts move on.  One such case came out earlier this week and I highlight it because it touches on a point that employers sometimes lose sight of — the ability to still make subjective decisions and have that decision supported by… Continue Reading

Drug Testing Rules in Connecticut – “Employees” May Not Actually Be Employees

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Laws and Regulations

It’s been a little while since I’ve discussed quirky statutes that are often overlooked or misunderstood when talking about employment laws in Connecticut. Certainly, the drug testing laws in Connecticut may not be overlooked, but portions of it are often misunderstood. Indeed, I suspect that many employers (and lawyers) are unaware that an "employee" as defined in the drug… Continue Reading

Is Connecticut’s Economy “Glass” Half Full or Half Empty? Numbers Tell a Mixed Story

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Legislative Developments

For employers in Connecticut, this isn’t exactly the best of times. But it isn’t the worst of times either. That seemed to be the message of a variety of economists at a conference I attended yesterday sponsored by the Connecticut Business & Industry Association. In fact, a CBIA survey released yesterday (and sponsored by Blum Shapiro)… Continue Reading

What I’m Reading This Week — “So Much to Say” About Employment Law and HR Developments

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Discrimination & Harassment, Human Resources (HR) Compliance, Laws and Regulations, Litigation

With iPods becoming ubiquitous, I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels like they are listening to more music in general.  A favorite song of mine is "So Much to Say" by the Dave Matthews Band song.  (Don’t try reading too much into the lyrics — there isn’t much there.)  But this week, "So Much to Say" seems… Continue Reading

Background Checks and the Hiring Process

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Human Resources (HR) Compliance

George Lenard, who runs the popular "Employment Blawg", has an interesting post this week about how current job seekers will have to undergo different scrutiny than perhaps the last time that they engaged in a job search.  As George notes, the biggest change is the prevalent use of background checks by employers.  George provides some useful… Continue Reading

Court Oks “Firing” a Not Yet Hired “Employee”

By Daniel Schwartz on Posted in Litigation

"You’re hired. No wait, you’re fired." That’s essentially what happened in the case of Petitte v. DSL.net, a decision recently handed down by the Connecticut Appellate Court.  The Appeals Court rejected Mr. Petitte’s claims that the company should be estopped from firing him. The background is fairly straight-forward: Mr. Petitte applied for a position as… Continue Reading