LEGAL NEWS
Race Discrimination: Employee Suspended for Threat Has Viable Claim, Court Rules
When an employer receives a report that an employee has engaged in misconduct, it may be reasonable for the employer to suspend the employee pending an investigation and a determination that the employee does not present a threat to the workplace, especially if there is the potential for violence. However, an employer should ensure
that it responds consistently when faced with similar incidents. If it doesn't, a jury could conclude that its conduct was a pretext (cover-up) for discrimination. The case involves two Evergreen Packaging employees, African American supervisor, Oren Jones, and white employee, Jeff Connor. After Jones was put on unpaid leave for doing a similar act that Connor had also done to him (and Connor did not face the same punishment), Jones sued Evergreen, alleging that his suspension constituted race discrimination. The district court disagreed with Jones and granted summary judgment (pretrial dismissal) in favor of the employer.When Jones appealed to the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, the 8th Circuit reversed its decision. The 8th Circuit held that a jury could find that Jones was discriminated against based on Evergreen's treatment of Conner because Evergreen treated Connor and Jones differently "in terms of investigations and punishments." When faced with potential workplace misconduct, consider how you conducted investigations in similar circumstances in the past and how other employees were disciplined for comparable conduct. If an employee in a protected class can show that he was treated worse, the door to potential liability opens.
Read more DRUG SCREENING
A Brief History of Psychotropic Drugs Prescribed to Mass Murderers
One of the participants at the Active Shooter Exercise at the Pueblo Complex conducted by LANL, stated that most of the mass shootings that have taken place were the result of domestic disputes, workplace anger or other issues and only a few were the result of mental illness or drugs. This caused me to wonder how many of the
reported mass shootings really were the result of issues other than mental illness or drugs. The more I researched this question, the more surprising the results became. It should be noted that most of the users of psychotropic drugs do not have the potential to be mass murderers; yet all of the mass murderers listed here had been prescribed one or more psychotropic drug. However, the number of people who could potentially experience one or more adverse side effects was shocking! In some cases only one in 1,000 people experience adverse side effects, but if the drug were prescribed to 19 million people, literally thousands of people could experience adverse side effects. What follows is the result of my research and question, ―What psychotropic drugs where prescribed to mass murders?‖ Adam Lanza, the killer at Sandy Hook elementary school was prescribed Fanapt, a controversial anti-psychotic medicine. The drugs outlined here are not the only ones that can cause the opposite of their desired effect. Several anti-depressant medications are also restricted to adults, for the depression they inspire in kids rather than eliminate.
Read more Medication Prevalence Among Mass Shooters
Advances in medicine have helped millions of people cure or reduce the impact of ailments, including mental illness. While mood stabilizing drugs and antidepressants help individuals regain control over their emotional and psychological struggles, another statistic that has been cited is the prevalence of mass shooters who are on prescription medication. While the relationship between mental illness and mass shootings is a larger issue, a related point focuses on medication side effects that include suicidal ideation (a risk factor for assault). What would be interesting is to tally the number of mass shooters who have been on psychotropic medications. This is one facet that has been not well covered by the mainstream media or lobbyists for obvious reasons. There is an inherent loop in depressed people taking antidepressants and then later killing themselves (and/or others).Was the cause the anti-depressant or the underlying depression? Is the medication the source of the behavior or a correlated indicator? These medications may possibly provide the stabilization to carry out their plans. How this relates to workplace violence prevention and threat assessment does raise additional questions. How would an investigator even know about medications that a subject is taking since this is considered private, confidential medical information? For security professionals, we need to consider if knowing about prescriptions with potentially destabilizing side-effects is important and how we would find out about them regarding a subject.
Read more 20
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27