Search for: "Coach, Inc" Results 101 - 120 of 1,483
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 May 2023, 11:05 am by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Updated guidance published by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) warns employers that the end of the COVID-19 health care emergency did not automatically end employers’ responsibilities to provide accommodations granted during the COVID-19 health care emergency, to consider new requests for accommodation from applicants or employees claiming disability from COVID-19 or other pandemic related conditions, or to comply with the medical confidentiality, interference… [read post]
11 May 2023, 7:00 am by Evaleen Hellinga
Employers must begin addressing concerns about productivity with coaching and proceed with progressive discipline before terminating for cause. [read post]
1 May 2023, 4:36 am by Peter J. Sluka
  The best my research could uncover were: Matter of Taines v Gene Barry One Hour Photo Process, Inc., where the court refused to grant the purchasing shareholders lenient payment terms based on their oppressive conduct (123 Misc 2d 529, 539 [Sup Ct, NY County 1983]); Matter of Elniski v Niagara Falls Coach Lines, Inc., which allowed installment payments (101 AD3d 1722, 1722 [4th Dept 2012]); and In re Rapid Recovery Enterprises, Inc., which… [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 2:00 am by Valeh Nazemoff, Engage 2 Engage
She has also been featured in many publications such as Inc., Entrepreneur, SUCCESS, Fast Company, Huffington Post, and more. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 11:00 pm
”After she filed suit against the Hudson River Park Trust, and Friends of Hudson River Park, Inc., her case was thrown out because a New York County Supreme Court found that Oetiker had “assumed the risks of playing or coaching tennis” in that area.And, on appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, agreed and upheld the case’s dismissal. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 11:00 pm
”After she filed suit against the Hudson River Park Trust, and Friends of Hudson River Park, Inc., her case was thrown out because a New York County Supreme Court found that Oetiker had “assumed the risks of playing or coaching tennis” in that area.And, on appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, agreed and upheld the case’s dismissal. [read post]