Generally, employers can be held vicariously liable for the tortious conduct of an employee committed within the scope of his or her employment. This often arises in
the context of negligence cases, such as automobile and workplace accidents. However, employers can also be held liable for defamatory statements made by their employees when those statements are made within the scope of their employment. Therefore, it is important to mitigate this risk through effective policies and procedures and employee training.
Employers do not need to police employee communications around the clock. However, employers can and should provide clear policies about employee conduct in the workplace and appropriate use of social media to mitigate the risk of being held responsible for an employee’s misconduct
Keep up with the latest and dive into all areas of hospitality news through our converge blog with new articles posted each week
Purchase Textbook
Hospitality Law: Managing Legal Issues in the Hospitality Industry is a practical approach to hospitality law
Join GATTHA
Research, Connect, Network & Publish with the Global Alliance of Travel, Tourism & Hospitality Attorneys
See What's New
California Supreme Court Rejects De Minimis Doctrine For Off-The-Clock Work Claims
August 7, 2018 via ConvergeBlog
The bottom line is that the California Supreme Court believes that employees should be paid for all of their work, and that any difficulty in capturing this time for its non-exempt employees is the employer’s problem to resolve.
The Legal And Operations Impact Of Pooling Staff Tips July 30, 2018 via Hotel News Now
Recent changes to U.S. law regarding who is eligible to participate in tip pooling will have an effect on the relationship between tipped employees and certain back-of-house staff, particularly in food-and-beverage outlets.
You’d be hard pressed to find many management side employment lawyers who favor
broad use of Zero tolerance policies, and from what I can tell, the employee side lawyers have about as many concerns as do we. Why is that?
