Photo of Jonathan M. Scandling

Jon focuses his practice on the representation of management in all aspects of labor and employment law. He provides counseling and training to clients for best practices on a wide range of human resource issues such as terminations, compliance with employment laws, workplace investigations, and the preparation of policies and employment agreements. Jon also assists with the implementation of arbitration agreements and policies for employers.

Jon has extensive experience in public sector labor & employment law, with much of his practice revolving around traditional labor matters. Prior to Frantz Ward, Jon worked for Cuyahoga County as an Assistant Law Director in the Labor & Employment Group. While at the County, Jon’s practice involved traditional labor matters where he represented management in a complex labor/management relationship comprised of over 37 separate bargaining units, employment litigation and general employment counseling. He appeared in both state and federal court, and represented management in State Employment Relations Board hearings, contract negotiations, grievance arbitration and various other forums. Jon also has extensive experience dealing directly with various public sector unions, ranging from deputy and correction officers to office workers and clerical employees. He also was a law clerk for the State Employment Relations Board in Columbus.

No later than September 30, 2019, employers with 100 or more employees must file EEO-1 Component 2 to report workforce pay data for the years 2017 and 2018.  In light of the approaching deadline, we want to update employers briefly on the status of the reporting obligation, offer some key tips for compliance, and finally,

The National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or “NLRB”) has issued notice that it will propose a new rule establishing that students who perform any services for compensation, including, but not limited to, teaching or research, at a private college or university in connection with their studies are not “employees” within the meaning of Section

Recent reports of campaigns designed to discourage potential employers from hiring Trump Administration officials raise the question of whether a private sector employer would have any jeopardy for going along with such a boycott. The answer depends upon where the act takes place. Fifteen states,[1] plus Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, prohibit