Workplace discrimination laws provide employees with protections to overcome the concept of “at-will” employment where a worker without an employment contract may be terminated for little or no reason.
Lawmakers in Ohio seem to have the same idea, as a measure is proposed for the Ohio Senate to consider expanding civil rights laws in the state to address sexual identity and gender orientation discrimination in the workplace and in housing.
]]> Nearly half of the states—21 states and the District of Columbia—have enacted such laws, however, there is no law in Ohio or at the federal level that specifically prohibits employment discrimination based upon sexual identity or sexual orientation. More localized provisions, generally ordinances passed at the city or county level, have been passed in communities scattered across the country.Like at the federal level, Ohio lawmakers have previously considered expanding Ohio’s workplace and housing discrimination laws to include the identity and orientation issues. However, in 2009, the proposal did not make it through the senate.
The measure to be considered in the Ohio Senate includes an exemption for religious organizations. A state senator from Cuyahoga County, Ohio says that bi-partisan support is necessary for the measure to make it through the Ohio Senate. Proponents of the bill hope that the religious organization exemption in the civil rights law will help in generating bi-partisan support.
The Ohio proposal would not apply to small businesses that have fewer than 15 workers.
Source: 10TV News, “State Lawmakers Plan To Resurrect Anti-Discrimination Law," May 8, 2013
]]>The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act is intended to prohibit employers from making work-related decisions based upon a worker’s genetic information. That includes information concerning a worker’s family medical history. And the worker’s civil rights law applies at all stages of the employment process, including at the job application stage.
]]> The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission says that an East Coast nursing and rehabilitation center has violated the federal civil rights law. A lawsuit has been filed against the nursing facility alleging that the company not only violated GINA, but also the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.The lawsuit says that the nursing and rehabilitation center unlawfully conducted medical examinations of job applicants after the prospective employees were giver a job offer at the facility. During that medical examination, the potential worker was asked to provide his or her family medical history, in violation of GINA. Applicants who were hired were subjected to the process annually, according to the employment law litigation.
The lawsuit also has allegations brought under the ADA. The nursing home is accused in the litigation of refusing to provide reasonable accommodations for a worker while she was still in her probationary period with the company. Other workers allegedly were fired for disabilities or perceived disabilities, according to the lawsuit. Three women reportedly were either not hired, or were fired, related to being pregnant.
Workplace discrimination laws provide important protections for workers. The most recent case involves a fairly new law related to genetic information and family medical history. As we move further through the 21st century, health and medical issues seem to be a hot button topic. Protections are in place for workers that prohibit employers from discriminating based upon medical history.
Source: EEOC, “EEOC Files Class Genetic Information Discrimination Suit Against Corning Rehab Center," May 16, 2013
]]>Cincinnati area residents may know that Ohio and federal laws prohibit discrimination in the workplace. Yet, as followers of this blog may recognize, acts of discrimination continue to arise in the American workplace. In the Wet Seal case, a woman says that back in 2009, she overheard an executive vice president of the retail chain make discriminatory remarks when a group of corporate staff toured the Pennsylvania store.
]]> The woman says that a corporate executive (who reportedly no longer works for Wet Seal) remarked that the manager did not fit the company image. The manager says that the corporate exec told a district manager during the visit that the woman, who is black, was not the right fit. She says that the exec wanted a manager who had blond hair and blue eyes. The black woman reportedly was fired the very next day.The equal Employment Opportunity Commission looked into the matter. The EEOC investigates allegations of employment discrimination under federal law. After completing a lengthy probe into the allegations, the EEOC found that former executives of Wet Seal did indeed discriminate against workers on the basis of race.
Notably, new management apparently is in place at the retailer since the time that the allegations first arose. Nonetheless, the allegations did not go away. The current CEO of the retailer says that “From the moment I became CEO of Wet Seal in January, I made clear that we value a diverse work force and believe that a dynamic and representative employee base allows us to best serve all of our customers," according to The Inquirer.
The company has agreed to settle the lawsuit for several million dollars. The chain store will also make changes to expand its human resources department to better investigate claims of discrimination. The company also has agreed to post opening for management positions in such a way to promote diversity in the workplace.
Source: The Inquirer, “Wet Seal to pay $7.5M in Philly-area discrimination case,” May 9, 2013
]]>The case involves allegations that the company has policies the hamper a woman’s effort to seek promotions, and also company policies create a culture that punishes women for taking maternity leave. The woman reportedly stated working as a sales rep in 2004.
]]> She says that she has performed well as a sales rep—her lawsuit says that she has been a top performer. Despite that record, she says that she received unfair evaluations after taking legally protected maternity leave in 2010. Not only did the poor performance evaluations stall her career, she says that she was demoted for taking the leave, according to her sex discrimination lawsuit.One of the issues she has with company policies is related to how supervisors and managers are paid under an incentive plan. She claims in her court papers that managers get a decrease in pay when a worker takes legally protected leave. That policy promotes discrimination against women, according to the workplace discrimination lawsuit.
The woman reportedly is seeking class-action status in the case. The company could not be reached for comment after the lawsuit was filed earlier this week, according to Reuters
The lawsuit is filed in New Jersey, apparently under both state and federal law. Although the case is not directly filed in Ohio, the federal laws governing workplace discrimination apply to Ohio workers. It is unlawful for a business to discriminate against an employee based upon gender. As today’s story highlights, some company policies may be suspect if the policy creates discriminatory practices within the company.
Source: Reuters, “Merck sales representative claims sexual bias, seeks over $100 million," Ransdell Pierson, May 9, 2013
]]>Followers of this blog in Ohio may recognize that the American’s with Disabilities Act protects workers who have physical and mental impairments from having to face discriminatory practices in the workplace. A jury in Iowa recently heard the evidence in a disability bias lawsuit that had alleged that a Texas-based turkey farm company had exploited workers with intellectual disabilities for years.
]]> The lawsuit alleged that a group of 32 men were subjected to harassment and discrimination based upon their mental impairments. The lawsuit essentially focused on the years 2007 through 2009, although the EEOC says that the disabled workers had been subjected to severe abuse for roughly 20 years.Last year, a judge awarded the workers more than one million dollars in a wage dispute. The judge ruled that the turkey farm operation had woefully underpaid the workers for years. The more recent jury trial addressed issues of abuse and discrimination in the workplace.
The EEOC says that the workers were forced to live in substandard conditions while working for the turkey growing operation. The men all reportedly suffered from intellectual disabilities. The lawsuit alleged that supervisors launched verbal abuse toward the workers, as well as subjected the men to egregious forms of physical abuse during their employ.
Workers say that they were physically struck by supervisors. On at least one occasion, a worker was handcuffed. Workers were forced to carry heavy weights as a form of punishment in disciplinary matters, according to the evidence. The men were essentially ignored by management when workers suffered pain or injury, according to the lawsuit.
The disabled workers also were not given proper medical care, according to the EEOC. The lawsuit alleged that the company had exploited the men, who did not know for 20 years the extent to which the treatment that they had been receiving on the job was violating their civil rights under the law.
The jury deliberated over the evidence presented at trial and ultimately awarded the 32 men who had suffered the abuse a record award in damages. Each of the men was given more than $5 million in compensatory damages and $2 million in punitive damages in the jury award. When combined with last year’s wage and hour award, the total combined damages awarded in the workplace discrimination case exceeded $240 million.
Source: EEOC, “Jury Awards $240 Million for Long-Term Abuse of Workers with Intellectual Disabilities,” May 1, 2013
]]>The woman says that when she became pregnant, she needed to use the restroom more frequently, raising the hackles of her supervisors due to the quota system. She watched her intake of food and liquids, but her blood pressure rose. She decided to use her vacation time to use the restroom on the job. She would clock out to use the restroom, signing back in when she got back to her desk. But that system used up all of her vacation.
]]> She elected to take unpaid medical leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act to protect her job. When she returned to work after the birth of her child, she says she was fired a short time later. She says that she either forgot to take 12 cents of a customer’s bill, or removed the wrong charge from that bill. She says that the 12 cent mistake is what her employer says was the basis of her termination.Discrimination issues can be complex. Generally, an employer may make some kind of paper trail to avoid allegations of discrimination. Many states, such as Ohio, are considered “at-will employment law states where an employer really does not need a reason to fire a worker.
However, when a termination is based upon discriminatory reasons or violates public policy (such as in a whistleblower situation, or when a worker is fired in retaliation for filing for workers’ compensation benefits) a worker may have an employment law case.
It is not clear if non-pregnant women or male workers were required to clock out to use the restroom, which could be relevant in a pregnancy discrimination case. T-Mobile says that it abides by all the laws, but declined to comment on the woman’s situation, according to ABC News. The woman says that she does not intend to sue.
Source: Source: ABC News, “Pregnant T-Mobile Employee Clocked Out to Use Toilet,” Abbey Ellin, May 1, 2013
]]>The Cleveland-based company, Presrite Corporation was accused of widespread gender discrimination at three different manufacturing plants in Ohio. The women claimed that female job applicants were frequently denied jobs based upon their sex. Less-qualified male applicants were hired for entry level jobs, according to the sex discrimination lawsuit. The women who made it through the job application process say that they were subjected to discriminatory conduct in the form of harassment while in the job.
]]> Civil rights and human rights laws protect workers from workplace discrimination at every level of the employment process. Employment discrimination laws would have little effect if a person never has a true opportunity to get a job in the first place based upon discriminatory reasons.Similarly, employers are prohibited from demoting a worker for discriminatory purposes. Many stories involving workplace discrimination focus on allegations of wrongful terminations. But Ohio and federal law apply more broadly to the entire work experience.
Many workers may fear raising a workplace discrimination complaint on the belief that complaining about the conduct may result in adverse employment decisions down the road. As we have discussed, retaliation complaints are common in employment law, topping the list of complaints filed last year nationwide. A worker who has suffered discrimination or harassment in the workplace may have a remedy through legal processes under Ohio and federal law.
Source: EEOC, “Presrite Corporation to Pay $700,000 and Offer 40 Jobs to Settle EEOC Class Action Lawsuit,” April 30, 2013
]]>Times have changed somewhat since the mid-1990s. ENDA has been considered from time-time-time in the intervening years since it was narrowly defeated, never garnering enough support to pass. But DOMA is currently under review in the United States Supreme Court, and more lawmakers support same-sex marriage than did in previous decades. Under that backdrop, a bipartisan group of U.S. senators have reintroduced ENDA in the Senate.
]]> Our readers from Ohio may recognize that federal workplace discrimination laws can involve complex issues. Generally, the federal civil rights laws protect workers from discriminatory practices in the workplace based upon race, national origin, religion, age, gender or disability. The reintroduced measure seeks to add sexual orientation and gender identity to federal employment discrimination laws.ENDA was reintroduced in the Senate Thursday. A companion bill has also been introduced in the U.S. House. Lawmakers are hopeful that the measure may be able to gain enough steam to pass with the current debate concerning same-sex marriage gaining steam. The bill is expected to be sent for mark up in the Senate this year. However, analysts say that prospects for the bill in the House may be less clear.
The provision would prohibit discrimination in the workplace based upon gender identity or sexual orientation. But the law would only apply to companies with 15 or more workers. The proposed workplace discrimination law would not apply to religious organizations.
Source: Huffington Post, "Employment Non-Discrimination Act Reintroduced In Senate," April 25, 2013
]]>Ohio residents may have heard of the issue from one of our neighboring states that has hit the national news. A 14-year-old student decided to wear a tee-shirt at school, which displayed a National Rifle Association logo and a picture of a hunting rifle. The teenager's stepfather says that a teacher approached the eighth grader in the cafeteria last week and requested that the student change his shirt-or to turn the shirt inside out.
]]> The teen reportedly was sent to the principal's office. Again, the student says that officials told him to remove his shirt. He and his stepfather claim that the shirt does not violate the school dress code. The student says that he has a First Amendment right to express his support for his Second Amendment rights.The teen was suspended for one day. Law enforcement also arrested the student for allegedly violating laws in that state that prohibit disrupting school. Law enforcement also accuses the teen of obstructing an officer.
The issue has raised new debate over civil rights in many quarters of the country. The school has a dress code that reportedly prohibits the display of profanity, violence, discriminatory content and sexually suggestive messages. Alcohol, tobacco and drug references are also prohibited under the school's dress code, according to ABC News.
Civil rights and other constitutional law issues can involve complex legal issue. Additionally, constitutional rights in public schools may be handled differently from other contexts in our culture. It is unclear how the issue in West Virginia will eventually progress, but the story has raised new debate over the scope of constitutional protections governing freedom of speech.
Source: ABC News, "W.Va. Teen Arrested in T-Shirt Flap Back in Class," Pam Ramsey-Associated Press, April 21, 2013
]]>In March, an environmental technician at the same hospital filed a race discrimination suit on somewhat different grounds. The man says that he has suffered discrimination in the workplace based upon his race--the environmental technician is white. The worker says that his supervisor began making derogatory remarks about the man beginning in 2007-and he says that the derogatory remarks included comments about his race.
]]> In addition to the comments, the worker claims that he suffered disparate treatment, including unjustified discipline and threats of physical violence launched by the supervisor. The hospital reportedly plans to defend against the lawsuit, which may ultimately be placed in the hands of a jury.Laws prohibiting racial discrimination in the workplace apply to all workers. Many workplace discrimination cases may involve allegations of unlawful refusal to hire a worker, adverse decisions such as a demotion, or a wrongful termination based upon the race of a worker.
But, racial discrimination issues may arise in the form of a hostile work environment. Workers need not tolerate the harmful effects of racial harassment in the workplace. Ohio residents who suffer from unlawful conduct involving harassment or discrimination should consider speaking with legal counsel about how workplace discrimination laws may apply in specific circumstances.
Source: Mlive, "White employee files reverse-discrimination lawsuit against Hurley Medical Center," Gary Ridley, April 15, 2013
]]>The university reportedly claims that the institution simply declined to renew the assistant coach's contract. The former assistant couch is now seeking redress in court. He has filed a wrongful termination lawsuit.
]]> The former assistant coach says that the University was well-aware of the head coach's conduct for six months before the university took action at the end of the basketball season. Initially, the school suspended the coach for three games, and imposed a $50,000 fine. It was later that the former head coach was terminated.Many Ohio readers may be aware that many states, including Ohio, are known as "at-will" employment law states. A worker generally may be fired with little or no reason, unless the basis of the termination violates the law. Workplace discrimination laws are in place to protect workers from discriminatory practices. But, there are other forms of law that protect workers in issues of public policy. Additionally, many laws protect whistleblowers who raise complaints with upper management about alleged unlawful conduct of a co-worker.
The recent wrongful termination lawsuit against Rutgers reportedly is being brought to address a whistleblower-type situation on the East Coast. The former coach says that he was fired for complaining to university officials about the unlawful conduct of the head coach.
Sources:
He joined the company with music industry experience, having produced records and managed musicians. Then he landed a job with Fox Sports as a music director, As senior openings in the music department came up--he says that he sought promotions with the backing of senior-level colleagues at the network.
But each and every time he sought a promotion, he says that a white employee got the job. He continued to report to white superiors who worked in positions he was denied. He says that the corporate culture at the network does not favor African-American workers for promotion to senior-level positions.
]]> The former music director is African American and is suing for race and disability discrimination. The network fired the former music director in February, while the man was out on disability leave. He says that not only did he run into a glass ceiling at the network, but he was terminated while on disability.His lawsuit claims that 34 people work in senior-level positions-that is positions recognized as the vice president level o r higher. But he says not one of the upper-level employees is black. He says in his court papers that he cannot remember a black ever holding a vice presidential position or higher in the network's 19-year history. He says that is because of a cultural problem that involves racial discrimination.
Racial discrimination in the workplace continues to occur in many professions across the country. Ohio readers who follow this blog must know that workplace discrimination laws apply at all stages of the employment relationship--beginning at the hiring stage and continuing all the way through to the end of an employment relationship. Obviously, promotional decisions are not immune from the protections provided under laws protecting workers against discriminatory practices.
Source: Courthouse News, "Racism Alleged at Fox Sports," Matt Reynolds, April 9, 2013
]]>The woman reportedly was not only humiliated, but ultimately she was unemployed after undergoing the brain surgery. She now seeks justice in a disability discrimination lawsuit in federal court that she has filed against Hooters.
]]> Initially, the former waitress says her supervisor told her that she could return to work after surgery with the short hair that had begun to grow after the brain surgery. But management at the Hooters restaurant later gave her conflicting information. The woman says that she was required to wear a wig to cover up the buzz cut and her surgical scar when she was at work.At first, she says that she tried to comply with the wig mandate, but she says that the wig was not comfortable, and worse, she says that the wig was adversely affecting the post-op healing process. The wig impaired the healing of her brain surgery incisions. Ultimately, she says that she was forced to leave her employment due to her healing scar and the treatment she received at work over the issue.
A post operative healing scar is a medical issue. Followers of this blog may understand that the American with Disabilities Act prohibits employers in Ohio and the rest of the country from discriminating against a worker due to a disability. But the law provides protection against disability discrimination in a broader sense.
The federal anti-discrimination law prohibits discrimination based upon an actual disability, a worker's past history of disability and any perceived disability that the employer thinks may exist, such as a perceived disability based upon a person's appearance.
The former waitress reportedly is working as a nurse these days, but seeks justice for what she says was disability discrimination when she was trying to work her way through school and needed brain surgery.
The St. Louis restaurant denies the allegations. The restaurant is apparently fighting the lawsuit, or arguing for the case to enter arbitration out of court.
Source: Belleville News Democrat, "Suit: Hooters waitress forced out after surgery," Associated Press, April 7, 2013
]]>A woman became pregnant last spring. She works for United Parcel Service, who reportedly agreed to place the woman on light duty during her pregnancy. However, UPS reportedly said that the light-duty work would not count toward seniority of benefits. The woman says that the proposed accommodation differed from light-duty accommodations offered to other workers who were temporarily disabled for conditions other than pregnancy.
]]> The two cases involve different concepts, but generally highlight the various federal employees' rights laws that may come into play surrounding a pregnancy. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act prohibits employers from discriminating against a worker due to a pregnancy-related issue. The FMLA provides qualified workers with job protection when taking medical leave, including maternity leave. The ADA meanwhile, requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to disabled workers.A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (Ohio is located in the Sixth Circuit) held that the Pregnancy Discrimination Act did not require UPS to provide a pregnant worker with reasonable accommodations (that case was brought by a different worker than the recent complaint). However, that case was filed before amendments to the ADA became effective, and before the EEOC issued regulations that provide guidance on the ADA amendments.
The two complaints have been filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Employment law attorneys and workers generally initiate a workplace discrimination claim with state agencies and/or the EEOC before bringing a lawsuit in court. The EEOC is charged with investigating employment discrimination complaints and may seek to mediate the issue before any lawsuit is filed.
Source: Thomson Reuters News and Insight, "Two new cases seek to clarify pregnancy discrimination laws," Anna Louie Sussman, March 1, 2013
]]>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued guidance on the subject of pregnancy-related conditions in 2011. The agency believes that the ADA as amended in 2008 should require reasonable accommodations for pregnant women. Two complaints have been filed recently on that subject.
]]> In March, a woman filed a complaint with the EEOC with the assistance of lawyers, claiming that she was unlawfully denied reasonable accommodations under the ADA during her pregnancy. The woman works as a cleaner at a Southern United States hospital. She says that her pregnancy complicated her carpal tunnel syndrome and asked that she be given light duty as a reasonable accommodation.She says that she requested that she be allowed to work without having to lift heavy objects due to her pregnancy-related condition. She submitted paperwork from a chiropractic neurologist to support the medical condition. But her employer said that she needed to have the medical opinion supported by an obstetrician. Her obstetrician had referred the patient to the chiropractic neurologist for the diagnosis.
The woman says that instead of granting the requests for a reasonable accommodation, her employer placed her on involuntary medical leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. The FMLA requires that qualified workers be granted up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for medical or family reasons. However, the worker-who reported earns $9.09 per hour-says that she was wrongly forced to take FMLA leave and that the hospital should have granted her request for reasonable accommodation under the ADA.
In the next entry, we will continue the discussion of recent developments in employment law related to pregnancy discrimination, the FMLA and the ADA, including a discussion of a second complaint and how recent amendments to the ADA may have broadened its protections to pregnant women.
Source: Thomson Reuters News and Insight, "Two new cases seek to clarify pregnancy discrimination laws," Anna Louie Sussman, March 1, 2013
]]>