This week we explore the topic of Quiet Firing and how it can cause employers legal trouble in the workplace.
It's the follow-up to last week's episode on quiet quitting. This week Thom and Kathleen discuss Quiet Firing and how it can cause an employer serious legal problems in the workplace.
You are listening to Cover Your Assets, a podcast that discusses the timely and significant legal issues faced by employers. Kathleen Jennings is an attorney who has over 30 years of experience in advising employers as to their legal responsibilities and has written extensively about employment law. Inner Popular Cover Your Assets blog. If your business has employees you cannot afford not to have your assets covered.
Thom Jennings (00:34):
Hello everyone and welcome to the Cover Your Assets, the cover, your Assets. Where did it go? How about just cover your assets? The, I knew there was a V in there somewhere. Labor and Employment Law Podcast, Tori and myself, your host, Thom Jennings. And of course as mentioned in our lovely intro, which I still don't know if that's what we, we paid for the intro through a service called Fiver. And I don't know if that's an actual human being or if that's ai. What, what's your, what's your take on it? Resident expert Kathleen Jennings.
Kathleen Jennings (01:09):
Well, hey Thom, how are you doing this great Labor Day and Labor Day is a great day to be talking about labor and employment. To answer your question, it doesn't really matter cause I think it sounds good. So that's really the most important feature that we like the sound of it. At least I like the sound of it. Do you not like the sound of it?
Thom Jennings (01:32):
We, well, if there's anybody out there listening, I, we'll, we'll solicit some, some feedback, cuz I dunno, you know, I, I listen to a lot of podcasts. I know, and they, the intros are either like these big and bold, you know, I think the sports ones are kind of big and bold. And then some of 'em, they just launch right into it. They just have a little bit of music at the, at the front end, and then they launch into the podcast without any lengthy intro. But I don't know, I, I, I sometimes I just like to change things up, but, we'll, we'll keep it the same intro for now, but I'm, I'm definitely thinking about changing it up.
Kathleen Jennings (02:08):
Okay, well, whatever you think is best, you are the producer.
Thom Jennings (02:13):
Whatever's going to launch us into the labor and employment loss stratosphere in terms of ratings, which right now we're, there you go. We're not quite in the stratosphere. We're in the lowest sphere, whatever that is.
Kathleen Jennings (02:25):
Well, we'll just keep at it because I think people are finding our podcast useful and hopefully a little bit entertaining as we like to talk about every week.
Thom Jennings (02:34):
Absolutely. And, and so last week, if you didn't have a chance to listen to the episode, it was a very popular topic. It's one that's, I guess what the kids say is trending. It's been trending on all the social media platforms. A subject called Quiet, quitting. And of course, when you have a subject that's trending, usually somebody has to find a different angle on it. So I found an article recently about a newer trend, well, it's not really a newer trend. Again, we're just kind of naming things that were going on cuz Quiet Quitting was going on before we called it Quiet quitting, but it's called Quiet Firing. So that's what we're gonna talk about today on Labor Day of All Days, we're gonna talk about quiet firing.
Kathleen Jennings (03:15):
I don't know if that's really appropriate, but I guess that's our topic. So let's have at
Thom Jennings (03:20):
It. It is, and I, I, you know, I don't know if there's statistics out there, but if you think about it, the days that the, the days that people get fired, most often Labor Day would be one of the least, least amount of times people would get fired throughout the year because it's typically a day off. Right?
Kathleen Jennings (03:38):
It is. So that is good point. That
Thom Jennings (03:40):
Is a good point. So,
Kathleen Jennings (03:41):
Thom Jennings (03:42):
Quiet, quitting just for a recap was well, you know what, let's not recap. Let's just make people go back into the archives and listen themselves. We shouldn't have to, I think we shouldn't have to repeat ourselves. This isn't Batman where you have the previous episode bleeding into the second one. Is it?
Kathleen Jennings (03:59):
No, we are not Batman. At least you are not Batman.
Thom Jennings (04:04):
I am not. But quiet firing is a topic that is, as we discussed a little bit off air in, in many ways it's probably a topic that is more significant and something that you would have to be very aware of as an employer because it would expose you to more legal. Or is it legal exposure? What's the terminology? I'm looking for a lawyer.
Kathleen Jennings (04:29):
It could expose you to liability.
Thom Jennings (04:32):
Liability. And we'll do the, we'll I'll give you a quick summary. Quiet firing. So quiet, quitting. We know what that is. Quiet firing is when the employer on the other end does things to kind of unmotivate or demotivate. I'm not sure which term is more proper, but we'll use both of them. An employee, and this can be done in very subtle ways or maybe some not so subtle ways, but either way it's going to create a disgruntled employee. And what do we know about disgruntled employees?
Kathleen Jennings (05:07):
We know that disgruntled employees are not productive employees and they tend to be employees who are going to look for another job.
Thom Jennings (05:16):
And they could also be somebody, they're gonna be the one that initiates a lawsuit. They could be somebody that starts union activity, any of those things.
Kathleen Jennings (05:25):
Well, those are the worst case scenarios. You're absolutely right, Thom.
Thom Jennings (05:29):
So quiet firing. One of the components of it is, and we'll, we'll maybe we'll, we'll drill these down to, to individual methods and kind of discuss those and, and go through 'em. And I'm, I've dealt with pretty much all of 'em, surprisingly, not surprisingly we'll start with the promotions. So within an organization there, I mean every organization handles promotions differently. You, if a position comes up, you can either hire externally, internally, of course, if it's a external hire, it's not technically a promotion, it's just a hire. But when you have a position that opens, probably the first thing most companies would wanna do would be to work within the organization to promote somebody who's already demonstrated that they can be good at a lower position and then promote them to a higher position. Now, if an organization chooses to forego promotions for a certain, I don't know, certain type of employees or, or whatever, this could create an atmosphere, which is basically a, a method of, of quiet firing. Now when it comes to hiring practices and promotions and positions that come up, I mean, what, what, what's your suggestion in terms of the best way to handle it as an employer?
Kathleen Jennings (06:53):
Well, from a legal perspective, you wanna handle these positions in a way that doesn't generate claims of discrimination on the basis of any protected characteristics. So you wanna make sure that you're not promoting just white men or just white women or just a certain class of people to positions or hiring from outside of the organization to put them in these higher positions. You wanna make sure that there's not a pattern of discrimination. And if you do have a policy of promoting from within, it's probably best to have some kind of posting policy so that interested employees can apply for promotions or, or really any other position in the organization. Because if these positions are given out or the, the notice of these positions is done by word of mouth, sometimes you'll see a discrimination claim because the word of mouth may be going within a certain protected or, or certain unprotected group of people, rather than making sure that everybody in the organization is aware of the opening.
Thom Jennings (08:13):
And I would think that a common scenario, at least at, in my experience, what I've seen is one of the protected classes that you didn't mention is one near and dear to my heart. And that's, that's age discrimination. And employers, a lot of times, especially when they're trying to fill a higher position, they may hire somebody that's outta college or younger for economic reasons. I mean, the reality is if you're gonna hire somebody that has a length long, a lot of experience as opposed to somebody that's just out of college, the person just out of college are, they're probably gonna be cheaper, especially if they don't have a family or any of those types of things. But I would imagine that if that becomes a pattern, you really could open yourself up to an age discrimination lawsuit. Even though, again, the practical reason may be it's more economical for us to hire younger people or women, you know. So if you have a woman of childbearing age, maybe you don't promote her because she's pregnant. And that has to be a form of discrimination, isn't it?
Kathleen Jennings (09:23):
It is, it is, absolutely. When you make your promotion decisions, the decisions should be based upon the qualifications of the candidates. And you should ideally promote the person who is the best qualified for that position, not the person who is the lowest salary for the position necessarily, but you wanna have the best qualified person. So if you hire that college kid right out of college and pass over an employee that's been with your organization a number of years and has a good track record with the organization, then the employee, the older employee is, is possibly gonna claim that they were more qualified and were not placed in that position because of their age.
Thom Jennings (10:11):
Yeah, and, and oftentimes, I mean, I've heard of this situation happening, so I I know it's fairly common is that you'll bring in this younger employee at a higher, at higher pay at a, a higher level within the organization. And then the one that's been there that's longer has to train them. They basically have to help train their supervisor. And there is, I don't, there, that's a situation that I just don't ever see working out for anybody.
Kathleen Jennings (10:39):
Well, unless that younger employee is someone who really does have better qualifications, sometimes maybe they have a degree that the older employee or existing employee doesn't have that is necessary for the job. So it's not always going to be discrimination, but you need to look at the relative qualifications. And if it looks like the older employee really does have a better performance or a better idea of how to handle that job than the younger one, then you may have a problem and you're gonna breed resentment not only in that older employee, but other employees in the organization who see someone who's been passed over that they consider to be a, a good performer and a good employee and and maybe even a friend.
Thom Jennings (11:30):
Yeah, and and I, you also touched on some things that I, that I think are important to reiterate is that the process itself, there has to be, there has to be something within that process that is defensible. So for example, you have, and correct me if I'm wrong, you've got, you've got your white male, you've got your pregnant female, you've got your older, older female. Okay, so you've got two in a protected class. One not in a protected class, but of the three, only the white male has a master's degree and maybe in a, in the particular area that this position requires, or at least was, I know sometimes they say minimum requirements are this, but we prefer, you know, minimum requirement is a bachelor's degree. We would really prefer if he had a master's. So this guy has the master's degree. Now I would assume that would be defensible cuz you could say, well, I mean really the tipping point was the education component as opposed to the dis, you know, as opposed to any potential discrimination.
Thom Jennings (12:33):
Whereas if all three had similar education, similar amount of work experience, I believe that's where you could start getting into a little bit of trouble if it's, if there's a pattern of just hiring white males. And can I say, because you know, as somebody who was a white male and not in, in an age protected class for a long time, there, there's a lot of, a lot of white males out there that that feel really resentful and we'll just, we'll just say it because it's something that has to be identified. They feel that they're getting pushed out of positions just based on the fact that they're not within a protected class. And not to get political or idealistic, but
Kathleen Jennings (13:13):
I think you already did.
Thom Jennings (13:15):
Well I, I did, but I mean, the reality is, is that, that a lot of times it may appear that way, but it's not the case that there's still plenty of opportunities and plenty of jobs for, for everyone within this market. And there's a difference between protecting a group and, and in reality I think everybody's protected in some way, shape, or form. So this isn't one of those things where, oh, you know, we're targeting companies not to hire white males. If you have a white male that is the most qualified for the position, and you can rightfully say that the reason that you're hiring them is based on the qualifications and not their gender and not their age or any of those types of things, then you should feel confident that you're hiring the right person.
Kathleen Jennings (13:54):
I agree, Thom And white males can assert discrimination claims just like any other group of people
Thom Jennings (14:02):
Have. Have you run into that at all? Because again, I think that's one of those things where people think, oh, a white male can't be, but, but I mean a white male could always make claims of retaliation. Say they made a complaint that they weren't hired because they were a white male and somebody was hired because they were in a protected class.
Kathleen Jennings (14:20):
Oh, you have to remember that statutes like Title VII protect discrimination on the basis of race, sex national origin. Well, national origin is section 1981 and also Title vii. So it doesn't protect any one particular race. It protects people from all race discrimination or discrimination on the basis of race. So if race is being used as a way to choose people for a promotion, then that could be discrimination because if less qualified people are being passed over, then you have a problem.
Thom Jennings (15:05):
And there was a case actually that place where I, I used to work and the, the case didn't happen while I was working there. It was actually before I worked there where a group of white employees all got together because the, the, the head of this organization was African-American and they said that the only people that got promoted were African-American. So there you go. It does happen. But let's, let's shift gears now because I think we've kind of flogged that one, <laugh> that that topic a little bit. And we've certainly discussed it on other podcasts as well. But the other component of quiet firing, which can be difficult and really cause a great deal of resentment and I've experienced this, is, is where you just don't give out raises for extended periods of time. Now, there are situations where organizations like not-for-profits or even a a for-profit organization is just struggling and they can't give out raises. So you have to communicate that to the workforce and most, most places do. But where you start to run into problems is if your workforce's pay rate is, is fairly stable and then you start to see turnover and then you're having to bring in new people and you start bringing in new people at a higher rate of pay than the people that have been there for four or five years. And that's not good.
Kathleen Jennings (16:26):
Well, and that's a situation I think that a lot of employers are struggling with right now in this particular job market because it, they need to spend more money and offer more money in order to attract good talent. And in some cases maybe that money is more than what the existing employees are making because they were hired during the time when unemployment may have been higher. So that way labor, the labor costs weren't as high to attract that good talent. And, and that does create a problem. And now as, as we've talked about in other podcasts, you have to be aware that employees can and will talk about how much money they're making and they'll compare notes. And so your existing folks are gonna find out that the new folks may be making more money or they may even see it in a job posting somewhere that more money is being offered than what they're making. So that is absolutely a problem. And again, you have to make sure that when you do this, it's not going to be a basis for a discrimination suit. So you don't wanna offer more money to people of a certain group and maybe think, well, I can get these other folks in a different group for less money.
Thom Jennings (17:47):
Yeah. And, and I would, I would think that this would be something that would more so than than the promotion component. This would be something that could ignite that organized labor activity within the workplace. Because really if you get down to it, one of the key components of a union is they negotiate pay rates. Thank you. And I've been on both end, both ends of the perspective, you know, where exact same job, exact ta, exact same expectations. One was a non-union and I was there for seven years with no raises. And my current employer, I've been there for two and a half years and I've had bonuses, raises, additional pay that I have to get for doing extra work, all those types of things, you know, so there you go. I mean, if, if, if it comes down to the point where people feel that they're not being treated fairly as a group for the same amount of work, or there's larger expectations on one group than others, and we'll talk a little bit about that as well in terms of the whole quiet firing thing. You know, put, putting more work on certain individuals and not paying them more, which, which really is even worse than not giving them a raise, is not giving 'em a raise and expecting more out of them. And that really has that, if you look at the quiet quitting, that's been the basis of a lot of people quietly quitting. They're saying, Hey, you don't wanna pay me more money, but you want to, you wanna get more work out of me because we're in a tight labor market.
Kathleen Jennings (19:21):
Yeah. And I like how you have that whole quiet quitting dovetailing into the quiet firing. That was, that was well done,
Thom Jennings (19:30):
Dovetailing. I like that. That's the first time we've ever used that term on this podcast.
Kathleen Jennings (19:35):
It is, it is. You like that?
Thom Jennings (19:37):
I did, I did. I'm, I'm, I, I mean, I don't, I couldn't, it's, I dunno, it's not a term I use very often, but, you know, do you ever have words that just sort of show up and you haven't used 'em in a long time? So I'm probably just gonna throw that in a sentence over the next couple of weeks, just randomly
Kathleen Jennings (19:51):
Beam be my guest. Yeah.
Thom Jennings (19:54):
But truly though, they really, they really are. I mean, this is where quiet firing and quiet quitting in some ways, these last two podcast episodes are very complimentary because one, one can breed the other,
Kathleen Jennings (20:06):
They can, and I think it's also important for employers to recognize that you don't wanna, well, quiet firing is basically a passive aggressive way of trying to get rid of people. I think is, is how we could sum it up by basically not giving an employee rewards that you normally would pass 'em over for promotions. You don't give them pay raises. Maybe you give them to other employees. But at some point you have to be aware that quiet firing could turn into constructive discharge, which is an actionable legal claim, which is defined as making a work environment. So awful that someone has no choice but to quit. Now that's, you know, that's when you start making things really uncomfortable. Those claims come out a lot in sexual harassment situations, perhaps, but it could be if the, the boss is just piling on one employee, maybe the boss is screaming at this person, which we've talked about bad bosses and bullying, not a good thing. Or this whole passive aggressive approach is, is really not ideal. If you have an employee that is not working out, then you really need to address it head on and, and deal with the situation. Either help them try to improve the performance, put them on a performance improvement plan, and if improvement doesn't happen, they know the consequences. But this passive aggressive approach, I think is, is not ideal.
Thom Jennings (21:50):
And we, we've discussed that on plenty of previous episodes, so hopefully some of that's sinking into our regular listeners. But here's the final one, and this one's very pertinent to what's going on in the workplace now. And it, it's, it's a, it's kind of a, it's kind of an odd one. There's some nuances to it, but, and we discussed this off air as well. It, it, it's, right now a lot of employers are trying to bring employees back into the office, and so they're incentivizing them. And actually this can be done in the hiring process too. So for example, if you hire somebody and you give them a thousand dollars sign-on bonus, that goes back to the whole pay discussion that we had. So with a thousand dollars bonus, if this person lasts two or three months, ultimately they're getting paid more than the people that have been there for 15 years.
Thom Jennings (22:40):
Okay? So if you're gonna have those types of programs, you know, be aware there's, there's probably gonna be some pushback and maybe you should come up with a program for your current employees that at least acknowledges the fact that, hey, you know, yes, we're giving out a thousand dollars bonuses to the new employees, but we're able to give you, I don't know, I'd say extra vacation days, you know, any of those types of things. Some kind of reward to an employee that's been there a little bit longer to kind of offset that, that pain that employees are feeling. But, but having these incentives and giving things to people that are coming back into the office, what, what that article that that, that we, we read said basically was, you know, you're breeding some resentment. So if I've been sitting in the office for three years and all of a sudden you come back to work to the office and they got a bunch of balloons a $500 gift card to, to Kohl's or whatever, if there's Kohl's across the nation, <laugh>, I assume there is, but any department store or Amazon for that matter, I'm, I mean, I don't know.
Thom Jennings (23:44):
It's the, it's the, the prodigal sun analogy. You're gonna sit back and go, wait a minute, what about me? I've been kicking around for three years, busting my butt in the office, and now all of a sudden this guy shows up and, and the last time we saw him was on a zoom screen. And I don't even know if that was a cardboard cutout of him, but, wow. Why are you so happy that, that, that they're here today?
Kathleen Jennings (24:04):
Well, and, and by full disclosure, I have been working remotely for over 15 years. So I am one of those long-term remote workers, so I understand not only is
Thom Jennings (24:22):
There, you, you, you working remotely on this podcast. In fact, last week was the first time that you actually showed up in person. So
Kathleen Jennings (24:28):
I know, and I did, I didn't receive any
Thom Jennings (24:30):
Gift, no bonuses, nothing
Kathleen Jennings (24:31):
Special, no bonus, nothing, no balloon <laugh>, I would've accepted a a bagel a
Thom Jennings (24:38):
Kathleen Jennings (24:38):
You, nothing a bagel, nothing got nothing. So you
Thom Jennings (24:41):
Did, you got egg bagels, but that was, that was for something just that was just
Kathleen Jennings (24:45):
My sister. That was not for showing up for the podcast. Yeah, no, I, I got nothing. In fact, I, there was no air conditioning in the room even was That's right. A little uncomfortable. But anyway so yes, that when you, you start, employers are struggling with trying to attract people back into the office because a lot of folks worked remotely during the pandemic, got used to it, got comfortable with it, and now employers want them back in the office because they feel like it just creates a better team atmosphere. Everybody's there, you could see what they're doing and not everyone wants to come back. And, and speaking as someone who has worked from remotely is a long time. I get that, although remote work isn't for everyone, so you do have to be careful about showing appreciation for the folks that have been there the whole time and not go overboard in welcoming back the remote workers or even sometimes you'll see some folks are allowed to work remotely maybe part of the time now, and, but there are some folks whose jobs require them to be at the office all the time.
Kathleen Jennings (25:58):
Receptionist or somebody that has to actually greet the public. And so you wanna make sure that you show those folks that you appreciate the fact that they do come to work every day and they're there on time and they're the face of the organization and you know, maybe you have bring in lunch one day a week for the folks that are there, or, or show appreciation another way. I know some employers were doing that during the pandemic for the folks that that really did have to come into the office.
Thom Jennings (26:29):
Yeah. And I, I'll tell you story, family story pre pandemic, my wife you know, we had a family member that was diagnosed with a very serious illness and my wife was wife wanted having to be a caretaker and help with help the family and her employer was flexible enough to let her work remotely for two days, one week, three days of following week, and then split time with, you know, another family member that was helping. And to me that was, that's the kind of flexibility that you need. And in those situations, I, other employees in, in many ways that sends a message that says, Hey, we care about you. We're willing to be flexible, those types of things. So you're right, I think now things are a little different because again, you had the whole pandemic thing and there's a little different in terms of expectations for remote work.
Thom Jennings (27:20):
But if, if there is a situation where an employee can work remotely for one or two days a week, and again, you know, you really touched on another subject or something that's very important, it's not for everybody on some level. You have to have that kind of hard discussion with the employee and say, look, I know you wanna work remotely because some people think working remotely means, you know, I mean, I'm home. I mean, I don't have to deal, I don't have to do as much work. But in, there's probably, I mean, I know from when I took classes remotely in college, and this is, this is in 2008, 2009, that, that there was more work for the remote students than there were the ones that, that came in. So as an employer, you almost have to create the expectations that yeah, you can work remotely, but there's gonna be, you're gonna actually have to do more than the people that come into the office. I mean, does that make sense or am I kind of veering off into the stratosphere again?
Kathleen Jennings (28:16):
I think you're veering off into the stratosphere a little bit, Thom, and, and that's okay. You know, you're happy there and so we'll let you hang out there. <Laugh>, I think, you know, what the pandemic has done is show some employer or many employers that remote work can be done or that some jobs can be performed remotely. And so now employers are making choices as to whether do we wanna keep some of these folks remotely all the time or working remotely all the time? Do we want everybody back in the office? And then there's gonna be issues with, there may be folks who have a disability, and we've talked about this in our reasonable accommodation episode, maybe working remotely is a reasonable accommodation for them. And if they've been successfully working remotely and there's no other barriers to it, then it is an accommodation that may have to be considered. So, as we've said before, for a lot of issues, it's not a one size fits all problem. It's, it's, you have to exercise some discretion and you, at the end of the day, you, you need to be fair, but you also need to be aware of certain legal requirements such as the reasonable accommodation.
Thom Jennings (29:42):
Yeah. And that may be a topic for another podcast episode because in, in terms of reasonable accommodation, a lot of people are using mental health issues. You know, is that a reasonable accommodation or is it just somebody trying to work remotely? But ultimately some people are really good at working remotely and maybe better employees remotely than they are in the office and vice versa. So there has to be a bit of a balance there too. But these, these are all, these are all very delicate situations and you just have to approach them on a kind of case by case basis. But, you know, before we get to our takeaways, I, I think that, you know, the, the takeaways seem to be the same in, in pretty much every episode. Is that it, it all comes down to fairness. You have to be, you have to be fair with your employees and fairness is not always equal. It's it's fairness. So those correct, those are the things that you have to make sure that you're addressing within the workplace. So with that, nice little transition. Takeaways.
Kathleen Jennings (30:45):
Takeaways. I would say quiet firing is not the ideal way to treat your employees. Being passive aggressive in that way could lead to resentment, which could lead to E E O C charges, possible union organization or just bad morale in your office. So it's not the best idea,
Thom Jennings (31:12):
Just don't do it. As opposed to Nike which says, just do it.
Kathleen Jennings (31:16):
Well, we're not here to promote other brands, bro. Right? But if you wanted to say that you could, but no, it's, as we've talked about on a lot of these podcasts, you want to deal with employee issues head on directly and honestly, and to me, quiet firing seems a bit cowardly and a little bit dishonest. So it's not a good look.
Thom Jennings (31:45):
Absolutely. And as far as Nike, if they do wanna sponsor us, they're not a sponsor, but we would happily take their sponsor dollars or any, any reasonable organization, not any organization cuz hey, not everybody's a good fit for our particular podcast, but if you wanna sponsor us, let me know. Speaking of that contact information, if they would like to utilize your legal services, Ms. Jennings,
Kathleen Jennings (32:10):
You can reach out to me via email at kj j wilo, w i m l a w.com.
Thom Jennings (32:19):
See, and I didn't do that last week and she gave me, she gave me a little bit of grief about that, cuz that's sort of the, that's part of the point of the podcast
Kathleen Jennings (32:27):
Is, you know, yeah, no contact information, no balloons, no gifts,
Thom Jennings (32:32):
Nothing, no air
Kathleen Jennings (32:33):
Conditioning. There I was, yeah, no air conditioning and I, there I was. So that's why I'm remote this week because I have air conditioning, I have central air conditioning.
Thom Jennings (32:43):
Yes. And that's a reasonable accommodation. Very reasonable. It's
Kathleen Jennings (32:47):
<Laugh>. Yes. At least in southeast Georgia it is. Yes.
Thom Jennings (32:51):
All right. Well that's always sis I'd much rather have you in this non-air conditioned room, but it's always good to see you via Zoom and proving once again that people can work remotely together and still create a fantastic product. And with that being said, I will thank you once again for listening. Please consider sharing. We love reviews if you can put them out there. We love topic suggestions, all that kind of good stuff. And as always, thank you from the bottom bar bra from the bottom of our heart for listening to the Cover Your Assets podcast. We'll see you next.
The Cover Your Assets-The Labor and Employment Law Podcast is produced by Thom Jennings of the Caronia Media Group. For more details, you can contact him at email@example.com.
The information provided in this podcast is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this podcast or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Kathleen J. Jennings. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual hosts and guests.
Kathleen J. Jennings is a former principal in the Atlanta office of Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel, Schneider, & Stine, P.C. She defends employers in employment matters, such as sexual harassment, discrimination, Wage and Hour, OSHA, restrictive covenants, and other employment litigation and provides training and counseling to employers in employment matters.
Where Experience Counts