Porter Wright Launches Employee Benefits Blog

Employer Law Report is pleased to share with you the launching of Porter Wright's latest blog – Employee Benefits Law Report – which we have created as a resource to help guide employers of all sizes through the complex administrative and legal challenges facing their employee benefit plans.

This blog – edited by my partners Ann Caresani and Rich Helmreich – will provide the latest information in a wide range of areas related to Employee Benefits including:

  • ERISA and employee benefits litigation
  • Health care reform
  • Retirement plans
  • Audits and correction
  • Benefits issues related to mergers and acquisitions
  • Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs)
  • ERISA fiduciary compliance
  • Health and Welfare Plans
  • Nonqualified Deferred Compensation/Executive Compensation
  • Tax-exempt/government employers

If you would like to subscribe to Employee Benefits Law Report and receive e-mails regarding blog updates, please visit the blog and enter your e-mail address. Alternatively, you may add www.employeebenefitslawreport.com to your RSS/XML feedreader.
 

Recent Terminations Highlight Need For Health Care Employers To Focus On Employee Education Regarding Social Media

We are starting to see an increase in the number of news articles reporting on health care facilities terminating employees for violating patient privacy on their facebook pages or other social media. 

Last December, one such incident made a fair number of headlines when a Mississippi hospital worker responded to a tweet from the Governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour, regarding the state’s “dire fiscal situation” and soliciting ideas to trim expenses.  The employee responded with a tweet that said the Governor should “schedule regular medical exams like everyone else instead of paying UMC employees over time to do it when clinics are usually closed.”  The hospital terminated the employee on the ground that her tweet violated HIPAA because it disclosed that the Governor had been a patient at the hospital.

More recent reports suggest that health care employers have become even more aggressive in terminating employees who have compromised patient privacy on their social media pages.  For instance, in June, it was reported that a hospital in Oceanside, California had terminated five employees and disciplined a sixth for using social media to discuss hospital patients.  The hospital’s CEO is quoted as saying that its investigation had not yet uncovered any evidence that patient names, photographs, or similar identifying information was posted by these employees, but the investigation had yielded sufficient information to warrant disciplinary action. 

Now, in August, we have seen two more news reports of similar firings.  First, in Michigan, a hospital employee was fired after reportedly stating on her facebook page that she had come face to face with a cop killer and that she hoped he rotted in hell.  Apparently, the post contained no other identifying information, though presumably one could piece together the patient’s identity from other recent local news reports. In addition, having a hospital worker stating publicly that she hoped that a patient rotted in hell does not exactly portray the hospital in the best light. Finally, another news account states that staffers at a Long Beach, California hospital posted at least one picture of a stabbing victim on the Internet. According to the report, four staff members were fired and three disciplined in connection with the incident.

Though employers are generally becoming aware of the need to implement social media policies, these incidents underscore that health care providers and facilities particularly need to educate their workforce regarding such policies to ensure that they fulfill their obligations towards patient privacy. 

Supreme Court declines to hear retiree benefits case

This is an update to my prior post on January 2, 2008 regarding retiree healthcare benefits.

A legal battle dating back to 2000 regarding retiree benefits came to a close recently.  In 2000, the Third Circuit ruled that treating Medicare-eligible retirees differently than younger retirees violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).  This prompted the EEOC to issue an exemption to the ADEA allowing employers to reduce or eliminate retiree healthcare benefits for Medicare-eligible retirees, while providing higher levels of benefits for those retirees who are not Medicare-eligible.  The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) challenged the EEOC's authority to issue this rule.  The district court and Third Circuit rejected AARP's challenge. 

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court, as anticipated, declined to hear AARP's appeal on this issue.  This means that, absent Congressional action amending the ADEA, employers can now provide retiree healthcare benefits and coordinate those benefits with Medicare without fear of violating the ADEA.