Ohio Employment Law Reform: S.B. 268

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

BakerHostetler logo
Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
Ohio employment law is an outlier in many ways when compared with similar federal law and other states' laws.
United States Employment and HR
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The Ohio General Assembly heard testimony on May 18, 2016, in support of pending Senate Bill 268 (S.B. 268), the Employment Law Uniformity Act. S.B. 268 seeks to amend Ohio's employment discrimination statute, R.C. Chapter 4112, to make Ohio employment law more consistent with federal law and the laws of other states.

Ohio employment law is an outlier in many ways when compared with similar federal law and other states' laws. For example, Ohio exposes employers to claims for up to six years and contains a byzantine structure allowing employee age discrimination claims in at least four different ways with different remedies and limitation periods. S.B. 268 seeks to shorten the six-year limitation period and to simplify Ohio age discrimination law by providing the same types of remedies and limitation periods as with other claims of discrimination. The current six-year limitation period allows for unnecessary skirmishes over faded memories and lost or misplaced documents, which could be avoided with a shorter limitation period that is more consistent with federal law and the laws of other states. 

S.B. 268 proposes damage caps for noneconomic and punitive damages based on the size of the employer, consistent with federal law. The proposed legislation seeks to end judicially imposed individual manager and supervisor liability by clarifying that, like with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, no individual liability exists under Ohio law. This reform is designed to end the practice of plaintiffs' attorneys suing individual managers as well as employers in an effort to avoid removal of the case to federal court. The legislation also seeks to establish an affirmative defense for employers that exercise reasonable care to prevent discrimination and harassment and to preclude concurrent claims by employers in court and before the Ohio Civil Rights Commission.

BakerHostetler partner Scott McIntyre testified on May 18 before the Ohio General Assembly in support of the bill at the request of the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and the Ohio Management Lawyers' Association. McIntyre leads the firm's Employment and Labor practice in Cincinnati and is a board-certified specialist in employment and labor law.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More