Employment Labor Law
From sexual discrimination and harassment to illegal hiring practices to protection from whistle blowing actions, employment law is a fascinating area that covers a breadth of topics.
The U.S. Department of Labor guides much of the labor laws in this country by providing guidelines on what can and cannot be done by employers. According to law, workers cannot be discriminated against based on gender, nationality, disability or age, and yet discrimination surely occurs at all levels of the hiring and employment process. Employment & Labor Laws help protect both employers and employees and govern the court proceedings when someone feels their rights in these areas are violated.
The comprehensive nature of laws in this area cover the hiring and wages of workers, the safety and health standards of the workplace, health benefits, retirement benefits and other forms of compensation, employment contracts, the hiring of non-resident workers, and much more.
Labor laws have been developed to govern the practices within particular industries, such as agriculture, mining, and construction. The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) is a federal agency that sets standards and guidelines for manufacturing and other industries with the goal of protecting workers and maintaining a safe working environment.
Employment Law Litigation vs Arbitration
Arbitration vs. Litigation
As with litigation, one of the primary factors of arbitration is the presentation and consideration of evidence. Unlike a trial, however, there are no formal rules as to what types of evidence are acceptable. This fact can mean greater flexibility for the parties involved as well as for the arbitrator. It can also, however, lead to increased confusion and conflict.
Basis for Conflict
In the most general terms, the lack of a rule structure with regard to evidence is the biggest problem in arbitration. More specifically, trouble arises from a variety of places. First, many arbitration cases are argued by NYC discrimination attorneys, whose approach is grounded in the legal rules of evidence. Second, there are those arbitration participants without any legal background, presenting what they consider to be evidence opposite a seasoned attorney. Finally, and probably most importantly, the nature of arbitration itself--dispute resolution--means that the parties do not agree on key pieces of information. Hence, they are both looking to strengthen their cases and weaken those of their opponents.
Role of the Arbitrator
In addition to the parties seeking a resolution through arbitration, the arbitrator himself plays a fundamental role in how evidence in presented and reviewed. There are those arbitrators, for instance, who believe that any consideration of the legal rules of evidence is inappropriate for arbitration. That is, they feel that the very nature of arbitration (and its ability to work) lies in its lack of rules and formality. In the case of evidence, anything goes.
More commonly, however, there is the belief that, for the sake of time and fairness, arbitrators must offer some guidance as to what types of evidence will and will not be considered. For most arbitrators, the solution lies in finding a balance between maintaining a working dialog with both parties while moving the case forward. He will seek to avoid, for example, lengthy arguments about what may or may not be admissible, but will share with the parties when a piece of evidence presented will not be weighed as heavily as others.
Evidence
Regardless of the rules regarding its presentation, the actual evidence presented in an arbitration hearing is quite similar to what one would expect in a trial--live testimony, depositions and affidavits, personnel records and employment agreements, and the rulings of other bodies and agencies. As in a trial, the more direct the information, the better.
Where arbitration and litigation part ways is in the way specific types of evidence are considered. Hearsay, for example, is almost always inadmissible in court, but may be deemed acceptable by an arbitrator. The specific circumstances of hearsay vary greatly, of course, but the arbitrator has the leverage to determine what information is reliable and relevant to the proceedings.
Contact the New York employment lawyers of The Watanabe Law Firm for legal assistance with employment law and discrimination cases in New York City.
Settlement Reached in Dispute Between City of Palo Alto and Children’s Theatre Director
At the direction of City Manager Frank Benest, the City of Palo Alto negotiated a final settlement with Pat Briggs, the Director of the Children's Theatre, to resolve her outstanding employment issues. The settlement was reached on July 21, 2008.
"This has been an extremely difficult time for our community, the Theatre, the City and Ms. Briggs. Now that we've reached a mutually acceptable agreement, we can begin the healing process," said Benest. "I have confidence that everyone can put aside their differences and work towards ensuring the continued success of our beloved institution, the Children's Theatre."
The City, in recognition of Ms. Briggs' long history and service to the City, has agreed to rescind her termination, and suspend Ms. Briggs for 30 days without pay, beginning June 30, 2008. Ms. Briggs, in exchange, has agreed to not appeal the administrative decision, and to waive any rights she may have against the City arising out of the criminal and administrative investigation. Ms. Briggs has further agreed to retire in good standing effective August 1, 2008. She will return and work for the City on a contractual basis as Advising Artistic Director to help transition the Children's Theatre into new management. Her contract will end January 2009.
"Following the loss of Michael Litfin and the strain and disruption of the last seven months, I think the interests of the Children's Theatre are best served by my retirement and assistance with the transition to a new Director. I am grateful for the support of the City, my staff, and the community for so many years, and look forward to helping ensure the Children's Theatre remains a treasure for future generations."
Jon R. Parsons Law Firm - Palo Alto Business & Employment Law
2501 Park Blvd, Suite #207
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Phone: (650) 321-8579
Fax: (650) 321-7929
Underwriters Are Not Exempt From Fair Labor Standards Act
New Jersey employment lawyer, Andrew Moskowitz reported in his February 22, 2010 article for "New Jersey Law Journal" (199 N.J.L.J. 518), "In Davis v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., 587 F.3d 529 (2d Cir. Nov. 20, 2009), the issue before the Court was whether underwriters who worked at a bank and reviewed loans 'in accordance with detailed guidelines provided by their employer' were exempt administrative employees under 29 U.S.C.Section 213(a)(1). Because the Second Circuit determined that these loan underwriters were "production/sales work" employees, not administrative employees, the Court held that they were not exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and therefore entitled to overtime compensation for time worked in excess of 40 hours per week."Â Read the full article here: EMPLOYMENT LAW - Underwriters Are Not Exempt From Fair Labor Standards Act
Delaware County Employment Law Misconceptions
Delaware County employment laws attorneys at DiOrio & Sereni, LLP are knowledgeable on all Pennsylvania laws including unemployment benefits, wrongful termination and discrimination, workplace safety, health care and medical leave, and employment mediation. It is common for individuals to question the feasibility of their employment lawsuit because there are common misconceptions in employment law.
Some common misconceptions are:
- Unemployment benefits are not available if you also receive workers compensation
- Harassment and discrimination mean the same thing
- Only women experience sexual harassment and gender discrimination
- It is an act of discrimination if an employer fires a minority individual
- The employee chooses when to take vacation time
If you questioned any of above misconceptions then it would be of your best interest to contact employment lawyers that have the experience to answer your questions and concerns. Employment disputes can get tricky just like that case handled by DiOrio & Sereni involving a former sergeant, London 44, who was promoted on October 6, 2008 and then unemployed the following day.
According to the civil-rights suit filed in federal court in Philadelphia, London was called into a meeting and told that a criminal-background check showed that a person with his name and birth date was convicted of burglary and sentenced to prison in 1978. London, however, would have been 13 years old that year and wouldn't have been eligible to do adult jail time for a felony conviction. As he tried to explain that the they had the wrong guy, the county did not give him any opportunity to be heard, which led his employment lawsuit. Consult an employment lawyer immediately to pursue your claim and clear up any misconceptions that you may have.
