An employer may be held liable for vehicular manslaughter committed by an employee after hours. An employee became intoxicated at a company party and then later, after he had returned home and then left again, crashed into another car, killing the driver. The parents of the victim may sue the employer because the employee was acting within the scope of his employment when he got drunk.
New York’s high court has ruled that an employer’s around-the-clock tracking of an employee’s movements was unreasonable. The court ruled that while an employer can track an employee’s movements without a warrant in some cases, the tracking was excessive in this specific case.
A federal court has ruled that, because a company did not properly define an employee’s job, that employee may pursue a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A night-shift dispatcher asked to be switched to a day shift because of his diabetes and hypertension. The company refused to switch the employee to the day shift and the employee sued. Because the job description did not specify that the night shift was essential to the job, the court allowed the lawsuit to proceed.