In a move that clarifies long standing agency policy, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has issued updated enforcement guidance on employers’ use of arrest and conviction records in employment decisions.

The Commission met last July to discuss the use of criminal records under Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act. The agency considered testimony from two public hearings and hundreds of written comments on the topic.

The new guidance is based on federal court precedent concerning the application of Title VII to employers’ consideration of a job applicant’s or employee’s criminal history, says the EEOC, and incorporates judicial decisions issued since passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1991.

The guidance also updates relevant data, consolidates previous EEOC policy statements on this issue, and illustrates how Title VII applies to various scenarios that an employer might encounter when considering the criminal records of a current or prospective employee. Among other topics, the guidance discusses:

• How an employer’s use of an individual’s criminal history in making employment decisions could violate the prohibition against discrimination under Title VII;
• Federal court decisions analyzing Title VII as applied to criminal record exclusions;
•  The differences between the treatment of arrest records and conviction records;
• The applicability of disparate treatment and disparate impact analysis under Title VII;
• Compliance with other federal laws and/or regulations that restrict or prohibit the employment of individuals with certain criminal records; and
• Best practices for employers

The EEOC also issued a set of Questions & Answers about the guidance.

The Internal Revenue Service has set contribution limits for Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) for calendar year 2013.

For calendar year 2013, the annual contribution limit for an individual with self-only coverage under a high deductible plan will increase $150 to $3,250; the annual limit for an individual with family coverage will increase $200 to $6,450.

For calendar year 2013, a “high deductible heath plan” means a plan with:

• An annual deductible that is not less than $1,250 for self-only coverage or $2,500 for family coverage (up from $1,200 and $2,400 in 2012); and
• Annual out-of-pocket expenses (deductibles, co-payments, and other amounts, but not premiums) that do not exceed $6,250 for self-only coverage or $12500 for family coverage (up from $6,050 and $12,100 in 2012).

Read the IRS announcement >>

In a unanimous decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court has ruled that employers can be held liable for failing to protect their employees from harassment based on sexual orientation.

The case involved an employee who claimed his former employer engaged in a discriminatory employment practice under the state’s antidiscrimination law when the company permitted co-workers to harass him and create a hostile work environment based on his sexual orientation. Following a trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the ex-employee and awarded him $94,500.

The company appealed, saying the state antidiscrimination law does not explicitly provide for hostile workplace claims with respect to sexual orientation. But the court disagreed with that argument. The law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the “terms, conditions or privileges of employment,” said the court, a well-settled term of art in antidiscrimination law broad enough to authorize harassment and hostile workplace claims.

Connecticut is one of 20 states, along with the District of Columbia, whose laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Experts say the decision is the first supreme court decision from any state to specifically hold that harassment based on sexual orientation is an actionable claim to the same extent as harassment based on sex or race.

Read the decision >>

Maryland has become the first state in the nation to prohibit employers from asking job applicants or employees to disclose their social media passwords.

Under the statute, an employer may not discharge, discipline or otherwise penalize an employee for refusing to disclose their “user name, password, or other means for accessing a personal account or service through an electronic communication device.” Nor may an employer refuse to hire an applicant for such refusal.

However, the law does allow an employer to require an employee to disclose any user names and passwords for “nonpersonal accounts or services that provide access to the employer’s internal computer or information systems.”

The new law also bars employees from downloading “unauthorized employer proprietary information or financial data” to a personal website or account, and reserves an employer’s right to conduct an investigation with regard to unauthorized downloading

The law takes effect on October 1. Similar measures are pending in California, Illinois, Minnesota and New York.

Read the law >>

A study from the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) shows that employers expect to hire more college students for summer internships this year.

Employers taking part in NACE’s 2012 Internship and Co-op Survey report plans to increase internship hires by 8.5% over last year. Nearly all expect to pay their interns.

Overall, responding organizations expect to pay bachelor’s degree level interns an average of $16.21 per hours. That’s down slightly from the 2011 average of $16.68.

A separate study by NACE found that internship programs are an effective tool for feeding full-time hiring efforts. In NACE’s 2011 Student Survey, nearly 90% of students who took part in internships said they would accept an offer of a full-time job from their internship employer.

The same study also found that paid internships correlate to better job-search success for college students. Paid interns were more likely to get a job offer, have a job in hand by the time they graduated, and receive a higher starting salary than their peers who took part in an unpaid internship or no internship at all.

Survey inforgraphic >>

More information >>

Working mothers care more about having flexible hours after returning to work than spending more time at home while on leave, according to a survey by TheLadders. When asked to prioritize six work scenarios, the majority (44%) of working mothers chose flexibility as most important versus only 5% who said they would opt for longer maternity leave.

TheLadders polled more than 250 women who are, or will soon be, working mothers. In addition to flexible hours and more time off, the working mothers ranked the scenarios as follows:

• Ability to work from home – 29%
• Convenient working hours – 20%
• On-site day care – 2%
• Generous paternity leave – 0%

Other key survey findings:

• She works hard for the money. The number-one reason respondents returned to work is for “financial reasons,” although resuming employment because they “enjoy their career” is a close second. Needing benefits (health/child care) and just wanting to “get out of the house” were less motivating reasons.
• You like me, you really like me. When asked how having a child impacts the way that working mothers feel they are regarded by coworkers, almost half (42%) felt their colleagues are “supportive and understanding,” while 18% believe that others “behaved the same.” Almost a quarter (24%) said their coworkers are “supportive, but don’t understand my situation” and a frustrated 16% said that their teammates are “resentful of my competing priorities or schedule.”
• It’s a balancing act. Balancing a career and a family is a huge struggle for 87% of respondents with 55% admitting that “excelling at both is overwhelming.” Thirteen percent “struggled at first, but now it’s under control.” Sixteen percent always put family first and work has suffered for it,” and 3% “always put work first and family has suffered for it.”

TheLadders is a career-focused online service that specializes in the 100K plus job search.

Members looking for qualified employees have free and direct access to thousands of unemployed National Guard members and military veterans through the American Jobs for America’s Heroes alliance. With more than 60,000 unemployed National Guard members nationally, this is a huge resource for employers looking for skilled, experienced and reliable employees. Register now for posting jobs at no cost at the Center for America home page, which is coordinating the alliance campaign.

Operating under an official Memorandum of Understanding with the National Guard and funded through private donations, alliance members Corporate America Supports You (CASY) and Military Spouse Corporate Career Network (MSCCN) work with employers using a case management approach to actively match National Guard members and military veterans to the specific job requirements of employers. Both nonprofit organizations have been providing free employment services to employers and military applicants since 2004 and have helped to place thousands in private sector jobs.