Archive for March, 2010

Twin Deputies Harassed, Discriminated in Compton

Wednesday, March 24th, 2010

A worker’s environment plays a crucial role in his productivity and well-being. So, there are laws enforced to maintain a person’s environment free from any factors that may hinder his means to earn income.

This should prevent any acts of discrimination and harassment that would create a hostile work environment and greater odds that he would have to beat in order to be compensated for his work.

One of the twin white deputies in Compton who filed a racial discrimination lawsuit against the county has recently testified of their ordeal and the abuse they allegedly suffered from their Latino colleagues and the county who failed to address their complaints.

Deputy Ryan Wade, 33, and his twin brother Richard Wade were allegedly discriminated, harassed, and retaliated against by their co-workers, who were mostly Latinos, for being white.

The twin also said that they were considered a snitch as their father, a retired police sergeant in South Gate Police Department, testified in behalf of the minority workers who claim that they are being harassed in SGPD.

Aside from the threats and taunts that the two allegedly suffered, they also were transferred to a lesser prestigious post at the Community College Bureau.

These inhumane acts of discriminating a person for his race should have heavier consequences to the defendant so that they will realize the gravity of their actions. If these allegations of Wade brothers were found to be true, then they should be compensated for the wrong done to them.

Government Agency to Issue Warnings on Deadly Baby Slings and Carriers

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

In so many ways, new parents often have their hands full, as caring for a baby is always a handful. For some multitasking parents who are on the go, a baby sling is a useful contraption more convenient than a stroller when going out with their child.

But according to the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), baby slings/infant carriers can be hazardous and in some instances, deadly.

A number of deaths and serious injuries have been linked to the use of these products. Aside from babies falling from the carrier because of soft fabric slings, infants have reportedly suffocated because some baby slings’ curved design can cause a child to get smothered in the parent’s clothing.

Infantino’s “SlingRider” in particular, after having been recalled for defective plastic sliders on the sling’s strap is still a cause for concern for many consumers because of its curved design or “C-like” position which has yet to be recalled or even addressed.

Other dangerous baby sling defects include problems with the fasteners, stitching and shoulder straps which have caused infants falling from the sling. Since 1997 around a dozen sling or front-wearing baby carriers have been recalled.

The CPSC has announced that it will issue a general warning to the public but made no mention of any recalls.

For parents, there is nothing worse than losing a child. The pain will doubtless be doubled especially in instances where the baby accidentally got suffocated in an infant carrier or fell down because of the baby sling’s defects.

Under the law, parents whose babies died or got injured as a result of a defective or dangerously designed baby sling or infant carrier has the right to file either a wrongful death claim or personal injury lawsuit based on product liability.

The law on product liability provides that manufacturers, suppliers, and even retailers can be held liable for putting a defective and harmful product out to the market. Product liability includes:

•    Manufacturing defects – Errors in the manufacturing process which may also involve poor quality materials or shoddy worksmanship
•    Design defects – Even if the product is well manufactured, it is still considered dangerous or defective because of its inherently hazardous design
•    Marketing defects – Also known as failure to warn defects – consumers can still get hurt by the product because of the absence of warnings or labels.

Billionaire Exculpated in Wrongful Termination Case

Tuesday, March 9th, 2010

A wrongful termination case filed by a former aide against the co-founder of Broadcom Corporation billionaire Henry T. Nicholas III was recently dismissed by the Orange County Superior Court jury.

The suit, which was filed last February 2009, alleged the Katherine Nichols was fired from her job after she testified in a federal investigation involving Nicholas. She previously worked at The Management Co., which is partially owned by Nicholas from
June 2007 to June 2008. Subsequently, the charges against Nicholas for federal securities fraud and drug distribution were dropped.

The jury however, in a vote of nine to three, decided against Nichols’ wrongful termination claim. Neither will the ex-aide receive any damages for her lawsuit as the termination of her employment appeared not to be based on her involvement and testimony in the federal investigation but on her failure to show up for work for at least two months.

Oftentimes, when an employee is fired from his job, the employee would often feel that it’s unfair or that his rights have been abused. While bitterness is a natural reaction to termination, there are certain instances when an employee can be considered to be illegally dismissed.

An employee can rightfully file a wrongful termination claim against his employer if he was fired because of discrimination based on his/her sex, race, color, religion, and disability; in violation or breach of his employment contract; or in violation of public policy (i.e. availing of FMLA benefits).

While most employers would anchor their defenses on “at-will employment” thus terminating an employee can be done at will and for any reason, the above-mentioned reasons are illegal and would constitute wrongful termination.

Also, aside from discrimination, breach of contract, and violation of public policy, an employee can also be considered illegally dismissed if he/she was fired because of retaliation, in contravention of implied contract and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealings.

But just like Nichols’ case, wrongful termination can be difficult to prove and oftentimes, it’s the employee’s word against the employer. Thus, it is very important to hire an expert employment attorney to assess your claim and handle your case. They would be able to determine, through documents and interviews in preparing your case, whether or not your claim would prosper. Otherwise, if there was too little groundwork later on in a trial, your whole case can collapse because of any evidence that might defeat your claim.

The Price is Right Producers Sued over Pregnancy Discrimination

Friday, March 5th, 2010

What’s the price for pregnancy discrimination?

Quite a huge sum actually the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has obtained $16.8 million worth of monetary benefits from pregnancy discrimination charges in 2009 alone.

Recently, Brandi Cochran, a former model for the long-time running game show “The Price Is Right” has sued the show for pregnancy discrimination.

In her lawsuit, Cochran claimed that as far back as 2007, she experienced harassment and stress over her pregnancy – when she suffered a miscarriage, a producer allegedly told her that it was nature’s way of getting rid of a bad baby.

When she became pregnant with twins again in 2008, a producer reacted negatively to the news and that another producer made a derogatory comment about a “wide load coming through” when she walked past.

She eventually lost her job after experiencing complications from her pregnancy and had to be on disability.

Under the law, employers are prohibited from treating women less favorably (harassment and termination) because of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. Likewise, a pregnant employee who is unable to perform her jobs because of her condition should be treated the same as a temporarily disabled employee.

However, harassment and discrimination still continue to persist against pregnant employees. All too often, employers see them as a “liability” because of their condition despite the fact that pregnancy is as natural and biological as one’s skin color, disability and gender.

Pregnancy harassment in the workplace is any physical, verbal, or written conduct that is unwelcome and offensive. Examples include demeaning comments, offensive jokes or gestures, pictures or sketches that related to pregnancy which can create a hostile work environment.

Pregnant employees who are discriminated and harassed on the basis of their condition have a right to file a complaint against an employer who has made her work conditions adverse or at the worst case scenario, fired her because of her pregnancy.

However, it should be noted that there are certain requirements in filing a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit. Legal experts, particularly employment lawyers should be consulted first before filing a claim to serve as a guide through the whole process.

Daughter of TV Show Star Killed by Family Pet in Dog Attack

Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010

Ashlynn Browning, the 4-year old daughter of Jesse Browning from the TV show “Ax Men” was recently killed in a vicious dog attack at the family home in Oregon.

According to the authorities, Jesse himself reported the attack when one of the family’s pet Rottweilers mauled his daughter. Although Ashlynn was airlifted to the Oregon Health and Science University Hospital in Portland, she was pronounced dead on the scene.

Clatsop County Sheriff Tom Bergin claimed that four months ago, a family member was also attacked by another one of their Rottweiler pets. The dog was euthanized following the attack.
The Rottweilers involved in Ashlynn’s death are currently under the custody of a local animal shelter. The Browning family may choose to put down the dogs, set it up for adoption or take them back to the house.

While dogs are often considered to be man’s best friend, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, every year around 4.5 million people are bitten by dogs. As much as 31,000 people underwent reconstructive surgery because of dog bite injuries while 885,000 needed medical attention.

Most fatal dog attacks however, involve babies and young children. Senior citizens also account for the second highest number of dog bite injuries and fatalities.

While some dog breeds are inherently dangerous (i.e. pitbulls), the owner’s negligence is often the proximate cause of dog attacks. For one, as the owner of the dog, it is the owner’s responsibility to train and socialize his/her pet as well as ensure that it is kept under control.

The owner has the duty to keep the dog leashed especially in public and if at home, properly fenced in. Sometimes, aggressive breeds are also required to be spayed and neutered in order to reduce its aggressive tendencies.

As important as it is to love and take care of pets, human life is no less important. Children, especially those at the curious stage could easily wander into an unsecured area with a territorial dog. Pedestrians and guests could also unwittingly stumble into situations where an unleashed dog can easily attack them.

Under the law, dog owners are civilly and in some states, criminally liable for the injuries their pets would inflict on other people. In a previous case in California, it was held that “The owner is virtually an insurer of the dog’s conduct” and in the event that the owner’s negligence results to injuries, the victim of the dog attack can recover damages from the owner.