Subscribe to Free Daily Newsletters
Post a Job

Featured Jobs

Assistant Team Leader

Nova 401(k) Associates
(Houston TX / Austin TX / Dallas TX / Scottsdale AZ / Telecommute)
Senior Actuarial Administrator

Group RHI
(TX / Telecommute)
Client Relationship Manager

Loren D. Stark Company
(Houston TX / Telecommute)
Plan Document Support Specialist

Actuarial Systems Corporation
(Sylmar CA / Telecommute)
Defined Benefits Combo Cash Balance Consultant

Loren D. Stark Company
(Houston TX / Telecommute)
Plan Document ERISA Attorney

Actuarial Systems Corporation
(Sylmar CA / Telecommute)
Retirement Plan Sales Territory Manager

Loren D. Stark Company
(Irving TX / Telecommute)
DC Plan Administrator

San Diego Pension Consultants
(San Diego CA)
Compliance Analyst (QKA)

Newport Group
(Folsom CA / Dallas TX / Walnut Creek CA / Annapolis MD / Burlington VT / Charlotte NC / Chicago IL / Fresno CA / Moline IL / Lake Mary FL / Saint Petersburg FL / Saint Louis MO / AL / IA / MN / PA / VA / WI)
Apprentice - Financial Services and Employee Benefits

Columbia Benefits, LLC
(Englewood CO)
Retirement Plan Relationship Advisor

Prosperity Advisors, LLC and SS&G Wealth Management
(Akron OH)

Free Daily News and Jobs

“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”

-- An attorney subscriber

Get the BenefitsLink app LinkedIn
Twitter
Facebook

<< Previous news item   |   Next news item >>



"Failure to participate in the screenings would subject the employee to financial penalties. For example, an employee that does not participate would not be able to receive a company contribution to the employee's health savings account of up to $1,500 for the year. Additionally, the employee would be subject to a $500 surcharge on medical plan costs, as well as tobacco surcharges of $1,000 that apply to the employee and the employee's spouse if they fail to take the screenings.... Because of the incentives ... the EEOC claims that the examinations are involuntary, effectively forcing employees to submit to the biometric screenings. The Eleventh Circuit rejected a similar challenge in Seff v. Broward County, FL, applying a separate 'safe harbor' provision of the ADA." [EEOC v. Honeywell Int'l Inc., No. 14-cv-04517-ADM-TNL (D. Minn., petition filed Oct. 27, 2014)]
Please click here to report this link if it is broken (for example, if you see a "404 File Not Found" error message after you click on the link above).
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® is providing a hypertext link to the item shown above, but is not the author of the item (unless otherwise specified).
© 2020 BenefitsLink.com, Inc.