Blog

For many workers in Ohio, facing racial discrimination and other types of civil rights violations on the job can be an all too common reality even when working for large employers. For example, the major retail chain, Target, recently agreed to a $3.7 million settlement after a lawsuit that alleged that its process of criminal background checks discriminated against African American and Latino applicants. The settlement is currently pending court approval. Under the terms of the settlement, the retailer will give priority to hiring Latino and black applicants who had previously been rejected from employment due to a background check. The lawsuit claims that these rejections often related to offenses that were years old or were unrelated to the positions to which they applied. The NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund said that the background check procedures harmed many qualified people looking for a good job, noting that these types of overly broad checks can limit opportunities for black and Latino workers in a way that amounts to racial discrimination. The lawsuit was filed as a class action complaint on behalf of all applicants who had been rejected from working at Target after May 11, 2006. The named plaintiffs in the case had 10-year-old misdemeanor convictions or drug charges. Target concluded the settlement offer shortly after the complaint was filed. The retailer said that its criminal history checks began over 10 years ago and that it continues to perform background checks. However, the check is now performed later in the process and is considered in addition to other factors. Employer practices can violate civil rights law when they have a disproportionate, unjustified impact on a specific group of people based on race, sex or national origin. An employment lawyer may be able to help employees who have faced workplace discrimination or who have dealt with discriminatory barriers when seeking employment to pursue justice and accountability.

The Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") limits an employer's ability to make disability-related inquiries or require medical examinations. During employment, employers "shall not require a medical examination and shall not make inquiries of an employee as to whether such employee is an individual with a disability or as to the nature and severity of the disability, unless such examination or inquiry is shown to be job-related and consistent with business necessity." Any employee can challenge a disability-related inquiry or medical examination that is not "job-related and consistent with business necessity." The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") has defined a "disability-related inquiry" as "a question (or series of questions) that is likely to elicit information about a disability." This may include asking an employee about the severity of a disability, asking an employee to provide medical documentation regarding a disability, asking about prior workers' compensation history, or asking about prescription medications, for example. A "medical examination" is a "procedure or test that seeks information about an individual's physical or mental impairments or health." A number of factors should be considered when assessing whether a medical examination is improper under the ADA. These include whether the test is administered and/or interpreted by a health care professional, whether the test is designed to reveal an impairment or physical or mental health, whether the text is normally given in a medical setting, and whether medical equipment is used, for example. In general, a disability-related inquiry or medical examination of an employee may be "job-related and consistent with business necessity" when an employer "has a reasonable belief, based on objective evidence, that: (1) an employee's ability to perform essential job functions will be impaired by a medical condition; or (2) an employee will pose a direct threat due to a medical condition." The 6th Circuit has held that this entails "dual requirements that there be evidence sufficient for a reasonable person to doubt whether an employee is capable of performing the job, and that any examination be limited to determining an employee's ability to perform essential job functions." Individuals who have suffered from workplace injuries can be particularly vulnerable to these types of inquiries or examinations. Pursuant to the EEOC, employers are permitted to ask questions or require examinations that are limited to the specific workplace injury and its impact on the employee only when necessary for the employer to determine the employee's eligibility for workers' compensation benefits. Nilges Draher recently defeated an employer's motion for summary judgment on this very issue. In Angel v. Bilfinger Weston, Inc. an Ohio federal court found there to be a genuine issue of material fact as to whether an employer was allowed to require an employee to submit to a medical examination, after the employer had previously required the employee to attend various doctors' appointments after a workplace injury. This is an unprecedented decision in the 6th Circuit. If you have questions regarding disability-related inquiries or medical examinations, please call us to discuss whether your employer has gone too far. The Angel v. Bilfinger decison can be accessed by clicking on this link: Angel Decision.pdf

Earlier this week, our firm filed a collective action lawsuit for unpaid overtime on behalf of a former Huntington Bank call center employee. The complaint alleges that Huntington failed to pay its call center employees for time spent booting up computers and logging into phone systems. If you worked for Huntington as a call center employee, please call us at (330) 470-8656.

For far too long the prevailing theory behind paying women less than men was that men had wives and children at home for whom they were the sole financial support. This provided employers with a rationalization for paying women less by assuming they were simply making "extra" money and not solely responsible for the support of the family. Fortunately, a plethora of legislation beginning in 1963 changed all that. With the passing of the Equal Pay Act in 1963, employers could no longer substantiate paying women less for the same amount of work due to antiquated notions about the American family. What the Equal Pay Act says about your paycheck The fact that your employer identifies your position with one title and a man's position with another has no effect on your right to equal pay. What matters is that the composition of your positions is substantially equal. The factors that indicate this equality include the following: Establishment: You and the other party must work in the same, distinct physical place. Even if you are at separate sites, as long as they fit into a distinct physical place, the law considers it the same establishment. Responsibility: Your position must involve the same level of accountability as others. Skill: This factor represents the education, experience, training and ability needed to carry out the duties of your job. Working conditions: This includes the hazards and physical conditions you face while on-the-job. Effort: This requirement encompasses the amount of mental or physical exertion you expend to carry out your job duties. If your job meets these conditions, but your pay is less than a male employee's, you may be the victim of pay discrimination. Of course, variables such as merit, seniority and quality or quantity of production may affect a particular person's rate of pay. The point is that your gender cannot prevent you from earning the same wage when all factors are considered equal. What you can do about it If you somehow discover that a male employee with whom you are on equal footing makes more than you do, you have the right to question why. If you do not receive either a satisfactory answer or an adjustment in pay, you may need to go outside of your company for help. A thorough review of your situation could reveal that you have a legally actionable claim.

The Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") requires employers to pay non-exempt employees time and a half for all hours worked over 40 per work week. Most call center employees qualify for overtime pay. Call center employees may be required to perform "off the clock" work, resulting in unpaid overtime for these employees. This "off the clock" work commonly includes, among other things, booting up computers and logging in and out systems and programs. There have been several lawsuits that have been brought and settled on behalf of call center employees. Earlier this week, our firm filed a class and collective action lawsuit for unpaid overtime on behalf of a former Securitas call center employee. The complaint alleges that Securitas failed to pay its call center employees for time spent booting up computers and logging in and out of programs. If you worked for Securitas as a call center employee, please call us at (330) 470-8656.

Some Ohio pro football fans may have heard that a former cheerleader for the New Orleans Saints has filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The woman, who was fired because of an unproven allegation that she attended the same party as a football player and a photo she posted to Instagram, is arguing in the complaint that the discrimination is sex-based because the rules for cheerleaders do not apply to players. The New York Times investigated further and found that the organization has several requirements that only apply to cheerleaders. They cannot post photos of themselves to social media wearing Saints gear, and they must have private accounts and block NFL players. They also must leave any unapproved events if an NFL player is there even if it is dinner in a restaurant in some cases. Players are not under the same obligation to not contact cheerleaders. Several other football teams have faced lawsuits from cheerleaders related to wages. The Oakland Raiders and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers both settled with cheerleaders while the Buffalo Bills disbanded their cheerleading squad after accusations of minimum wage law violations. Workplace discrimination is generally considered to be discrimination directed at an employee because of a factor such as race, sex, religion, disability and other protected characteristics. People who believe they are being discriminated against in the workplace may want to talk to an attorney about whether the behavior constitutes illegal actions and how they should respond. For example, many organizations have channels for reporting discrimination. Unfortunately, these reports are not always adequately investigated or addressed. If this happens, an attorney may be able to advise regarding the next step including the possibility of filing a lawsuit. Source: SB Nation, " Discrimination complaint, investigation reveal how much Saints try to control cheerleaders' personal lives ", Christian D'Andrea, March 26, 2018

The Fair Labor Standards Act requires that employers pay an overtime premium to most employees for all hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek. This applies to all non-exempt employees, even if they are paid a salary, day-rate, piece-rate or commission. Thus, never assume that you are not entitled to overtime because you are not paid by the hour. The class of employees who are not entitled to overtime (i.e., non-exempt employees) is fairly narrow. And, employers that claim an employee is exempt has the burden to prove it. If your employer does not pay you overtime for your hours over 40, you may be entitled to recover not only your unpaid overtime but also liquidated damages, which can be equal to the amount of unpaid overtime. Our attorneys have recovered over 24 million workers who were denied overtime pay. If you feel you have been denied overtime pay, contact us for your free consultation today!

Employment Litigation Practice Group Leader, Chris Lalak, recently appeared as a guest on Cleveland NPR radio program The Sound of Ideas to discuss employment law issues related to March Madness. If you missed the live March 15 broadcast on Cleveland NPR Affiliate WCPN and the Ohio News Network, video and audio of the program can be found here. The interview with Chris begins at approximately 35:30 of the audio broadcast, and 38:15 of the video broadcast. Click here if you would like to speak to Chris or another attorney about an employment law issue.

LGBTQ employees in Ohio concerned about workplace discrimination may find hope in recent federal circuit court decisions claiming that freedom of religion cannot be used to shield an employer from allegations of discrimination. There have been several developments in anti-discrimination law, particularly the impact that it has on LGBTQ employees. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that one transgender worker was a victim of illegal discrimination when she was fired after revealing her transitioning status to her employer. While this was not the first federal appeals court to hold that LGBTQ employees are protected by the prohibition on sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it was groundbreaking in its dismissal of a defense based on freedom of religion. The Detroit funeral home that was sued in the case said that its religious beliefs were the basis of the dismissal. However, in the 3-0 decision, the court sided with the transgender worker and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. While gender identity and sexual orientation are not explicitly protected under federal civil rights law, the Civil Rights Act does forbid sex discrimination. The court's ruling was based on this prohibition as the employee was fired because she failed to conform to the employer's expectations for her sex. The 6th Circuit also held that the business owner's religious beliefs were not substantially burdened by requiring him to not discriminate on the job. Civil rights attorneys noted that transgender employees frequently face workplace discrimination and that the ruling sets an important precedent. People who have been fired, demoted or subject to harsh treatment on the job due to their sex, race, religion, age or disability status may be victims of discrimination. An employment lawyer can help workers to fight for their rights and work to put an end to discrimination on the job.

Many construction workers travel away from home to perform work for their employers. When this travel results in an overnight stay, this travel time must be paid. And, it must be counted as "hours worked" in determining entitlement to overtime in the workweek. Often, however, employers avoid or refuse to pay for such travel time. Payment of "mileage" or providing a "per diem" for this travel is not enough. Employers must pay their employees an amount equal 1.5 time the construction workers' hourly rate where, including travel time, the employee works more than 40 hours in a workweek. If a traveling construction worker is not paid overtime for his or her overnight travel time, the worker may be able to file a lawsuit for unpaid overtime. In fact, if other employees are also not paid properly, the worker may be able to bring a collective or class action lawsuit. Our firm has recovered millions of dollars of unpaid travel time for our construction worker clients. If this has happened to you, we can help.

Workplace discrimination, including sexual harassment, is a serious issue in today's world. With more and more individuals coming forward with stories of harassment across the country, it is time to speak up and we can help. Sexual harassment is a form of workplace discrimination that violates both state and federal law. Sexual harassment can occur in a variety of ways. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, sexual harassment includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal and physical conduct of a sexual nature that either explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's work environment. You work environment can be affected if the sexual harassment unreasonably interferes with your work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment. You can also be retaliated against for reporting sexual harassment. This can also occur if you have been terminated, demoted, or have had other adverse employment action taken against you after you have reported the sexual harassment to management or Human Resources. If you feel you have been the victim of sexual harassment in the workplace, then it is important to speak with an attorney as soon as possible. Depending on the facts of your specific circumstances, you may have grounds to file a lawsuit seeking financial damages.

Being mistreated or punished in the workplace can be very upsetting. Not only can such conduct be emotionally painful, it can also jeopardize a person's employment status and livelihood. As such, it is important to know if actions like a firing or demotion are illegal. One reason why something like termination might be wrongful or illegal is if it is retaliatory. In this post, we will examine what retaliation is in the legal context and what it might look like. What the laws say Retaliation is the act of firing or otherwise punishing an employee for participating in protected activity, which is activity in which employees have the right to participate. This includes reporting discrimination, requesting an accommodation and filing a complaint about workplace harassment. Numerous Ohio and federal laws explicitly prohibit retaliation in the workplace. What retaliation looks like As we mentioned, firing someone for engaging in protected activity is one common example of retaliation. There are others, including: Demoting a worker Transferring the worker to a less desirable location Changing his or her schedule to purposefully cause personal conflicts Withholding pay or bonuses Cutting the person's pay Cutting the person's hours Starting hurtful rumors Being especially critical or negative about the worker's performance Physically hurting or threatening to hurt the worker These can all be ways that an employer retaliates against an employee. However, these actions are not always retaliatory. An employer is generally within his or her rights to discipline or terminate a worker for any other reason, so long as the decision is motivated by something other than retaliation or discrimination. If you have questions about whether you are the victim of retaliation, then it can be crucial to discuss your legal options with an attorney. Depending on the details and evidence in your case, you could have grounds to file a lawsuit seeking financial damages.