The US Supreme Court has recently voted 5-3 (Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting) which upheld an Arizona law that penalizes employers who “unknowingly” hires unauthorized foreign workers.

According to the High Court, the federal immigration law “does not pre-empt the Arizona statute”, specifically the Legal Arizona Workers Act which says that “the state can revoke the licenses of businesses that intentionally hire illegal aliens”. In addition to this, the Court also upheld the provision requiring companies to use the federal E-Verify system to check the immigration status of job applicants.

continue reading…

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Buzz it up
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later

How far can an employer continue with its operation despite workplace safety violations before he gets fined?

The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration could have answered this better as it had recently slapped a California construction contractor with over $235, 000 for willful violations of workplace safety rules.

continue reading…

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Buzz it up
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later

Under the law, it is illegal for employers to fire, demote, harass, or otherwise “retaliate” against employees or applicants for filing or participating in a discrimination complaint, exercising their rights (ex. asking for reasonable accommodation for a disability), or for engaging in a protected activity relating to workplace safety and health.

There are several laws that prohibit retaliation against these brave employees or applicants who are generally referred to as whistleblowers. Despite the presence of these laws, there are still employers who willfully and maliciously retaliate against whistleblowers.

Take for example, a recent lawsuit filed by the former manager of Southern California Edison, who claimed he was fired for reporting safety concerns at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspector.

continue reading…

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Buzz it up
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later

Charlie Sheen is obviously a very troubled celebrity – with a reputation for drugs and alcohol abuse as well as domestic violence allegations – but it didn’t keep him from being television’s highest paid actor for his hit TV show, Two and a Half Men. Or at least it didn’t, until he was recently fired by CBS and Warner Brothers from his role.

Sheen, who’s earning $1.8 million per episode, has filed a $100 million lawsuit against Warner Bros. and the show’s creator/producer Chuck Lorre for wrongful termination. In his lawsuit, Sheen claims that he was terminated in violation of his contract and that he is seeking to recover unpaid wages as well as compensatory damages. In his complaint, he alleged that Lorre and Warner Bros. unilaterally decided not to pay him as well as the cast and crew for the remainder of the season. That further, Sheen not only sought to pursue payment for his compensation but as well as for the entire cast and crew who are supposed to be paid for 24 episodes.

continue reading…

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Buzz it up
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later

The Queen of Talk, Oprah Winfrey who incidentally also has a reputation for being a philanthropist, is being sued by a former employee who allegedly suffered in a “hostile work environment” and was wrongfully terminated.

Catherine Dunn, who has been working as an assistant in Oprah’s OWN Network since August 2008, claimed that her Multiple Sclerosis was aggravated because of the stress she experienced at work.

Allegedly, when she was forced to take a leave of absence because of stress, she came back to find out that her position has been given to a younger and non-disabled employee.

Dunn is suing OWN for wrongful termination and discrimination and is asking for an unspecified amount of damages.

A hostile work environment is usually based on discrimination. This occurs when an employee’s work performance is affected because of derogatory or unwelcome comments or conduct based on sex, race, disability or other legally protected characteristics. Aside from the victim, other employees can also suffer from an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.

Further, if Dunn’s allegations about getting fired because of her medical condition were correct, Oprah is clearly in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Under this federal law, qualified individuals with disabilities are protected from employment discrimination – whether in hiring, giving of pay and firing.

Occasionally, because of their disability, some employees would ask for reasonable accommodation or take certain leaves which may be necessary in their condition. The ADA also mandates that employers provide reasonable accommodation to known physical or mental limitations of a qualified individual with a disability. However, if the accommodation would impose significant difficulty or expense on the part of the employer, such is not necessary.

Failure of the company or the employer to provide reasonable accommodation and to protect their disabled employee from discrimination, hostile work environment, and terminate a disabled employee is against the law. An aggrieved employee who was wrongfully terminated and/or discrimination may recover not just lost wages but also damages against the employee.

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Buzz it up
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later

In Livingston, Foster Farms is now being sued by a former employee for wrongful termination as the poultry company allegedly fired her for being pregnant.

The suit, which was filed by Sara Supple, alleged that she first went to the company’s HR department to inquire about pregnancy benefits. She was told to return but 2 or 3 hours afterwards, she was called back into HR and was immediately suspended over time card violations.

When Supple was called back to work, she was suddenly terminated based on the problem with her time cards. However, Supple’s lawyer alleged that his client never received any warnings or had any issue about her time cards prior to the time she asked for information on pregnancy benefits.

Under federal and state laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is illegal for employers to discriminate against and treat employees unfairly on the basis of their pregnancy. It is unlawful for employers with at least 15 workers to:

• Refuse to hire a pregnant woman
• Fire or force an employee to resign just because she is pregnant
• Refuse to give accrued benefits or leaves
• Retaliate against an individual for filing a pregnancy discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation

Take note that when companies refuse to offer sick leaves, this can be considered discriminatory especially against pregnant employees. Further, under the Family and Medical Leave Act, eligible employees may take up to 12 weeks off without pay to give birth, adopt, or to care for a sick child or family member.

Women have the right to keep their jobs as long as they are able to perform it. At the most, even if they get pregnant and would have to take time off work to give birth or care for a new child, they must be treated in the same manner as other applicants or employees who are disabled.

If you are pregnant and lost your job or benefits because of your condition, you may rightfully file a complaint against your company or former employer. There is however, a time limit as to filing a claim so get in touch with a gender discrimination attorney or a pregnancy discrimination lawyer to help prepare your case.

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Buzz it up
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later

Blonde bombshell and Desperate Housewife Nicolette Sheridan has dropped a huge bomb of her own. The actress has recently filed a lawsuit against the creator of the show, Marc Cherry and is suing him for assault and battery, gender violence as well as wrongful termination.

Sheridan alleged that Cherry was abusive towards the people working on the show and created a hostile working environment. She claimed that on September 24, 2008, she was physically assaulted by Cherry when she asked him something about the script.

The lawsuit described the attack as Sheridan getting hit by Cherry with his hand across her face and head. Although Cherry allegedly went to Sheridan after to ask for forgiveness, the actress reported the incident to ABC but no action was taken and the abuse only continued.

Teri Hatcher also allegedly complained about him and Cherry also said bad things about the actress. Aside from the physical assault charges, Sheridan claims that her character in the show was killed off unfairly hence her wrongful termination charges.

Sheridan is asking for damages worth more than $29 million.

While physical assault and gender violence is easier to identify, wrongful termination on the other hand, can be misunderstood by a lot of people. It is important to remember that while termination can be unfair but it doesn’t necessarily mean it is unlawful.

Often people would automatically label getting fired unfairly as wrongful termination but that is not always the case. Losing your job will always seem unfair but there are certain legal grounds that should be complied with before it is qualified as wrongful termination.

Under the law, the following are the grounds which would constitute wrongful termination:

• Terminating employee on the basis of discrimination such as nationality, religion, age, disability, gender and other protected characteristic

• Termination of employment as a form of sexual harassment

• Breach of oral and written employment agreements

• Firing an employee in retaliation for the employee’s having filed a complaint or claim against the employer, or participated in an investigation

In case they said grounds are present and wrongful termination is later on proven by the complainant, the fired employee may be awarded damages including lost wages and punitive wages. Also, the employee may also request to be reinstated to her former position.

• Bookmark on Delicious
• Digg this post
• Recommend on Facebook
• Buzz it up
• share via Reddit
• Share with Stumblers
• Tweet about it
• Subscribe to the comments on this post
• Tell a friend
• Print for later