Heading into the Valentine’s Day holiday is always a good time for HR professionals to dust off their company’s fraternization policies, and to remind your managers and employees of these guidelines.
First, don’t try to fight it, as workplace romance is bound to happen. But you do need clear parameters for employees to follow. A fraternization policy lets employees know exactly which relationships are and are not acceptable. A good policy has these four sections:
1. Purpose. Let employees know that a policy is necessary to prevent managers from playing favorites and protect the organization from sexual harassment claims.
2. Parameters. Spell out which relationships the organization will tolerate and which ones it won’t. Are bosses permitted to socialize with subordinates? What about relationships that could create conflicts of interest, disrupt work or make others on the team uncomfortable? Explain your limits. Supervisor/subordinate rules: It’s unwise for a supervisor to be romantically linked with a subordinate, and many organizations have a fraternization policy forbidding that practice. Very often, charges of favoritism, harassment and retaliation follow on the heels of those romances that have gone sour.
3. Procedure. If you allow romantic liaisons, consider asking each half of the couple to sign a “love contract” attesting that the relationship is consensual and that both parties understand your sexual harassment policy. Written documentation will come in handy if your organization is the target of legal action.
4. Punishment. Decide the consequences for employees who ignore your written policy on office romances. Specify the discipline in your policy. Some options:Transferring participants to different departments; termination if a relationship sours and veers toward harassment or retaliation.
Advice: Enforce your policy uniformly. Punishing one couple but not another for violating the policy will appear unfair and could increase your legal liability, especially if a supervisor is involved.
By Anniken Davenport
Employers who have successfully used visa-based immigration to round out their workforces with experienced specialist labor like doctors, nurses and engineers, or simply had to fill open seasonal positions at amusement parks, seashore restaurants or even Maryland crab-processing plants, face unique challenges this year. But here’s a plan for making sure you have the labor you need, whether you’re a health-care facility, a nursing home, a high-tech enterprise or in the agriculture, hotel and hospitality sectors.
Start early. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Department of Labor and all the embassies and consulates that work together to vet and approve potential work visa holders are working with reduced staffing levels, so planning as far ahead for your labor needs is essential. It’s not too early to think what your workforce composition in 2027 should look like either. Plus, anyone you do hire will be pleased that HR and management plan ahead.
Consider multiple visa categories. While H-1B may be the best-known work visa, there are many other categories in which your potential employee may qualify. And since the H-1B visa now comes with a hefty fee, it’s imperative that some positions you might have used that visa for switch to another. If you are going to use the H-1B, prepare the best petition possible so you maximize its potential issuance if you win a lottery spot.
The O-1 extraordinary visa. Also known as the Einstein or genius visa, this option is a possible alternative to the H-1B visa when the applicant can show awards, publications and other indications that they are extraordinarily talented.
Pay attention to job descriptions. Don’t draft general job descriptions—focus on accurate, specific descriptions that tie into your operational needs. Just as with any job description, identify the essential functions the foreign worker will have to perform.
Be ready for ICE audits and visits. Be sure that your managers understand how to handle a visit, and what information they should be ready to have inspected. Pay particular attention to your I-9 records and make sure they are up to date. It helps to have a clear system that tracks employee work-authorization status and reminds employees well ahead of document expiration dates that they need to obtain a renewed or different work authorization in a timely way. A centralized system may be best as it’s most likely to result in accurate, consistent record-keeping.
Designate someone to stay on top of immigration changes. We are in a period of rapid change, with an administration that has been known to make quick modifications. Someone should be monitoring immigration changes. That someone should ideally be your retained immigration counsel, who can update you and recommend an appropriate response to new rules.
By Anniken Davenport
According to several recent surveys, Americans in their 70s and 80s who have already retired fear their savings and Social Security earnings won’t be enough to sustain them in their remaining years. One analysis, the annual U.S. Bank Wealth Report, found that nearly two-thirds of retired Americans think they may need to return to work. What’s more, another survey of about 3,500 adults over age 65 found that 2026 is the year nearly one in eight of them intend to apply for a job. Of those, nearly 4% reported that they are currently applying for jobs.
As an employer, you may be worried about hiring older workers. Questions may include: Are older applicants healthy enough to resume work? Do they possess the current skills necessary? How long will they stay? Unfortunately, practical as those concerns may be, legally they are irrelevant. Here’s what you need to know.
Applications. Employers cannot reject older applicants because of their age if they’re otherwise qualified for open positions. That violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). To avoid potential failure-to-hire claims, you should remove any indications of age from application forms and scrub such data from résumés before putting the applications into the initial selection pool.
Interviews. Before beginning interviews, it’s crucial to remind everyone involved about your age-discrimination obligations as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Because disabilities rise with age, you likely will encounter some older applicants with disabilities ranging from mild to severe. Provide reasonable accommodations if the older applicant requests them. Otherwise, don’t assume disabilities. If you ask an older applicant about their ability to perform essential functions, you must ask every applicant the same question.
Once hired. If you do hire an older applicant, make sure you provide every benefit, including training and opportunities for promotion, on the same basis as other workers.
By Tyler Jubar
The flu is surging well beyond typical seasonal levels, and HR leaders can’t rely on outdated policies to protect their workplaces. Recent reports show flu cases climbing sharply nationwide, driving higher absenteeism and straining operations. A clear, current flu policy that is shared with employees helps limit workplace spread, reduce confusion and show employees that health and safety remain priorities.
Why a flu policy matters now
With emergency departments and outpatient visits rising due to influenza, employers need proactive plans that keep contagious employees at home while supporting healthy productivity. The flu spreads quickly in close-contact environments like offices, shared workstations and break rooms.
Building your flu policy
A flu policy works best when employees and managers can quickly understand and apply it. Focus on clear expectations and practical options rather than lengthy legal language.
1. Health expectations and prevention
2. Stay-home guidance
3. Flexible work arrangements
Supporting employees during flu spikes
A flu policy should feel supportive, not disciplinary. Temporary changes such as spacing desks, limiting large in-person meetings during peak weeks or sharing symptom reminders can reduce spread. Clear HR points of contact for questions about leave or accommodations help employees act early instead of pushing through illness.
The new year is here, and with it, the big HR headaches of the first quarter of 2026 are coming into focus. These issues include:
A newly aggressive EEOC. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enters the new year with a new Republican quorum, ready to carry out the Trump administration’s agenda as outlined in executive orders. High on the list of priorities is examining employers’ programs designed to address diversity, equity and inclusion, and determining which efforts pass legal muster and which constitute reverse discrimination. The agency says it has already launched extensive investigations into employers to identify possible instances of discrimination. Those efforts will likely be highlighted in traditional and social media.
NLRB changes. The National Labor Relations Board also now has a Republican quorum. Expect significant changes to the handbook rules that employers can impose on their employees. This may be beneficial to employers who have loosened their handbook rules over the last five years and now see a need to tighten them.
Accommodations. Several factors are likely to lead to increased disputes over return-to-office rules and requests for accommodations that permit continued telework. We’ve already seen a flurry of requests from disabled workers who don’t want to or can’t physically return to the office—some because they were hired during the pandemic rush that pushed disabled hiring to record highs.
Pregnancy. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) continues to drive lawsuits, especially from the EEOC. With important accommodation questions (such as exactly what pregnancy-adjacent conditions are covered and for how long) still unclear, this is the time when answers will come from courts, and regulatory clarifications will come from the EEOC.
What employers should do. We will be covering these crucial issues and much more as the Trump administration enters its second full year.
While no federal law specifies that employers must provide each employee with an up-to-date job description, it’s a serious mistake not to do so. Skipping this crucial step almost guarantees you will have at least one employee who is misclassified as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) when they should be paid on an hourly basis.
The best practice is to update all job descriptions at least once a year, preferably in conjunction with an annual review. This is because jobs change—employees may have been assigned new roles and taken on new duties that now place the job squarely within an exemption from overtime. Conversely, a supervisor may have removed responsibilities or duties so that the employee no longer fits into a standard exemption. The first employee should be reclassified as exempt and be paid on a salary basis with no entitlement to overtime. The second employee should be paid for all hours worked, including overtime for work that exceeds 40 hours per week.
Here’s how to update job descriptions and audit for proper classification:
The federal government is heading for a showdown with states over who gets to shape the future of AI. A White House executive order outlines an aggressive plan to challenge state-level AI regulations through lawsuits and potential limits on federal funding. The order creates a task force that, within 90 days, will identify “onerous” state AI laws and directs the Department of Justice to sue states and overturn state laws that do not support U.S. “global AI dominance.” The order also directs federal agencies to withhold federal funding for broadband development to states that insist on keeping AI laws on the books that the DOJ challenges.
At stake are dozens of state and local laws that restrict how employers can deploy AI in hiring, firing and employee evaluations, including those that require employers to perform non-discrimination audits of AI programs.
While the political battle will play out in courts and legislatures, HR leaders won’t be on the sidelines. These decisions influence how organizations assess AI tools, verify vendor compliance and build internal safeguards that employees can trust.
The order—titled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework For Artificial Intelligence”—directs the attorney general to establish an “AI Litigation Task Force” empowered to sue states whose AI laws allegedly violate federal protections like free speech and don’t interfere with interstate commerce. It also suggests that Congress enact a comprehensive AI law that preempts all conflicting state and local laws, hinting that the White House will soon present Congress with suggested legislation. The order highlights recently enacted AI safety laws in California and Colorado, which require model transparency reports and other disclosures that large tech firms and some employers argue create a confusing “patchwork” of requirements.
Most organizations already rely on a mix of state and federal rules to shape responsible AI use, especially in talent acquisition, monitoring and employee communications. If the federal government succeeds in creating one nationwide standard, HR teams may see faster clarification on issues like:
But the shift could also create short-term uncertainty. Industry groups and civil liberties organizations, including the ACLU, warn that weakening state oversight may undermine public trust in AI. HR teams should expect legal and compliance updates to accelerate as courts test the limits of federal authority and states decide whether to revise existing bills or move forward with new ones.
HR leaders can begin future-proofing now by reviewing current AI touchpoints across the employee lifecycle and mapping those that rely on vendor assurances. Establish a cross-functional group—HR, legal, IT and procurement—to monitor changes weekly and evaluate whether current AI tools meet likely national standards on accuracy, transparency and data handling. Building this internal readiness now positions HR to adapt quickly if a federal framework replaces state-by-state obligations.
Final note: If you are in a state or city that already requires employers using AI to recruit and hire to audit their AI program for possible discrimination, work with your counsel, as they can best monitor your AI obligations.
Holiday events can strengthen team bonds, but they can also amplify risk when alcohol, a relaxed atmosphere and end-of-year stress converge. Marjorie Mesidor, an employment attorney and founding partner at Mesidor PLLC, says HR can set the tone long before anyone steps into the venue.
Set expectations before the event
Clear expectations deter most boundary-crossing behavior. Mesidor recommends that HR and leadership:
Beyond policy reminders, HR can set up the environment to support safer choices—for example, offering appealing nonalcoholic options or designating leaders to periodically check in with employees who may need support or a graceful exit from an uncomfortable conversation.
Coach employees on practical boundaries
Employees often need direct guidance, especially in situations that blur social and professional lines. HR can share a quick pre-event checklist:
These reminders create a safer environment so everyone can enjoy the event without worrying about crossing a line or recovering from someone else’s misstep.
The Equal Pay Act (EPA), a federal law that is supposed to guarantee equal pay for equal work, prohibits employers from paying men and women different wages for substantially equal work that requires equal skill, effort and responsibility under similar working conditions. And Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits wage differences based on race, national origins, religion and other protected characteristics. Other federal laws like the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) also forbid wage discrimination based on age. Yet the court system is flooded with discrimination cases citing unequal pay.
Many states have stepped in with their own laws designed to make sure everyone receives equal pay for equal work. These laws include requirements that new hires not begin their jobs with starting salaries based on their past salary and that employers post salaries for open positions and promotions. The idea is to break the cycle of lower wages for equal work.
But employers may not realize they’re perpetuating past discrimination by not equalizing pay across protected characteristics. Nor may they realize, for example, that female employees in one division whose jobs are substantially equivalent to male employees in another division are being underpaid. That lack of awareness may end up costing an employer thousands, if not millions, of dollars in a lawsuit.
How to discover—and fix—unequal pay
Employers who want to fix the problem may choose to look for inequity and then equalize pay. There is a right way and a wrong way to do this. Here are the crucial steps:
1. Don’t do this alone. You don’t want to discover pay inequity and then announce it. That opens you up to a lawsuit. Instead, contact counsel to guide the way. By retaining counsel, your organization is protected by attorney-client privilege. The pay audit won’t have to be shared with the employee who sues you. The report will be for your eyes only. That’s much better than having to admit in front of a jury that you have been underpaying a protected group for years.
2. Get the right expert. Your attorney will bring in a statistical expert who can analyze your pay structure. That expert will be using advanced statistical tests, including multiple regression analysis, to determine whether any pay differences are the result of discrimination (intentional or unintentional) or some other factor (like experience level or job duties). The test can reveal the likelihood that pay differences are the result of change or due to a factor like race or sex. The expert’s report is also covered by attorney-client privilege.
3. Fixing the problem without drawing attention. If your expert uncovers red flags indicating possible discrimination, it’s time to equalize pay. You can do this without publicly admitting that there are pay differences. One option is to make the changes at your regular salary-adjustment time—typically year-end at evaluation time. This tends to trigger fewer questions about why some are getting larger adjustments than others.
Another option is to make the changes as part of an announced overhaul of your compensation system. Make equity adjustments. Fix any procedures and policies that may have contributed to the pay disparities. For example, if you have been setting starting pay based on salary history, revise your starting pay formula.
Final note: Remember that under the EPA, you cannot lower salaries but can only adjust up. For example, if you were paying men more than women, you must raise the female salary to the male level.
Sometimes business is booming. Other times, not so much. We appear to be heading into a downturn, and that means you may have to make some hard decisions, including terminations of some long-time employees. Is there a way to do so compassionately? According to lawyers at Littler participating in a recent webinar—Conducting Compassionate Reductions in Force—the answer is yes. Here’s how to do so.
Consider alternatives to RIFs. You don’t always have to cut employees entirely, especially if you think business will improve soon. One alternative is using furloughs to get costs down, but leaving open the possibility that you may soon need those workers back. A furlough is, by definition, a temporary absence from work without pay. It can include continued health and other benefits. Furloughs can also include pay reductions with reduced work for both hourly and exempt workers. Just make sure exempt workers still earn at least the minimum weekly pay for their classification and your state for any week they perform any work.
Voluntary exit incentive plans. Littler attorneys suggested that employers seeking a permanent reduction in staffing levels might choose to look for volunteers to leave in exchange for an incentive. If enough workers choose to voluntarily leave, others may not have to go involuntarily, creating goodwill for the employees accepting the incentives and those retaining their jobs. Be aware that special rules apply to older workers agreeing to accept incentives.
When a RIF is the logical answer. Employers who can’t make a furlough or voluntary exit plan work may have no choice but to conduct a RIF. If that’s the case, make certain that you identify and apply selection criteria that are both legal and fair. This should include careful documentation on a manager selection sheet.
Check that managers aren’t considering illegal reasons when ranking employees for inclusion in the RIF. That means excluding FMLA-covered absences from performance reviews and analyzing the final list for disparate impact on protected statuses like age, sex, race, disability and so on. Share this information only with your attorneys for protection under attorney-client privilege. You will likely need a statistics expert to help with the analysis.
Compassionate severance agreements. With most RIFs, you will want to get a severance agreement that includes a promise not to sue in exchange for a payment. You can add terms that make the agreements “compassionate.” These include terms like outplacement services, payment of bonuses not yet due and limited health insurance continuance.
Actual termination. Finally, make sure you perform the actual termination in a sensitive and compassionate way. Avoid termination by text message, for example.
