Do's And Don'ts in Planning An Employee Dismissa

Everyone that gets hired and is working in some company can be confronted with a dismissal, doesn't matter whether his fault or not. Having to dismiss an employee isn't fun, but sometimes it's the only option. Firing someone is always an unpleasant situation, but you need to face it as something that will inevitably happen in your organization, and before you even consider letting an employee who isn't meeting the expectations of the business go, it is important to take steps to remedy the situation beforehand. Doing so will help you protect your business from potential litigation as well as mitigate the shock to the employee if you must actually fire them.

It may not be easy or fun, but it is necessary. With proper preparation and a good attitude towards it, terminating an employee can be done with the minimum amount of disruption and the most positive good that can come out of the situation. Not to mention, you'll feel better about the scenario and sleep better at night. Also, layoffs might signal the end of this business relationship, remember we live in a small world and how you treat employees as they walk out the door can impact the reputation of both you and the company for a long time to come.

The litigious nature of the United States and common decency still demand that you follow certain protocols when you fire someone. Most employers know that terminations should be handled carefully. However, mistakes in the termination process, even by well-intended employers can, and frequently do, contribute to unnecessary, protracted and expensive litigation. The termination process requires advance planning and professional implementation. Given this, employers should handle terminations in a very discreet and compassionate manner in order to reduce the risk of litigation.

There are several steps you can take to fulfill your legal obligations to terminated employees and avoid escalating any hostilities over the firing. Following the right process can ease the stress of the situation, and help to ensure that you don't end up with a wrongful termination case.

Here are some guidelines that will ease the trouble of letting some employees go.DOS:    Do first, understand the details about the employee's performance upon which your decision is based.   

Do Offer Healthcare. Losing your job is a stressful time for anyone and the thought of not having healthcare can add considerable anxiety to employees.   

Do try to preserve an employee's dignity. It's natural for a person being fired to feel resentment toward you and your business. So, everything you do in a termination meeting should be designed to minimize, as much as possible, this natural resentment.   

Do set up a proper termination meeting. You'll want to conduct the meeting out of sight and earshot of any other employees, in a quiet place where you won't be interrupted. The meeting room should be in a location that does not alert other people as to what is taking place.   

Do get to the point. If employees still don't have an idea that you are going to fire them it is better to let them know within 30 seconds of the beginning of the discussion.   

Do show empathy for the employee. As a moral person your duty is to show empathy for the employee who is leaving. Some will reach acceptance immediately. Others might cry. Some might get angry. Your actions will be noted and judged whether you like it or not, and your actions in this situation can have some long-term consequences about how others perceive you, as well as other more practical consequences like litigation.   

Do make a plan for all work in progress. Once the employee you fired is gone, there will invariably be team work, clients and projects that need to be dealt with. As you piece together your firing strategy, make sure there are no gaps in productivity and that you keep your employees motivated.   

Do consider paying the employee some type of severance pay. Maybe the dismissed employee still needs some help in moving forward with things in his life for some reasonable period.   

Do review the decision to terminate.   

Do explain the cause of being fired. Even if the state allows employees to be fired at will, still it is best when you explain the cause and escape the possibility of a lawsuit. You don't have to spend a lot of time going over every last detail of the employee's conduct that led to the discharge, but you should provide a reasonable explanation.  

Do Select the Right people to meet with the Employee. When you are conducting the final meeting, it is preferable to have another person in the room with you. Doing so helps prevent any, "he said, she said" situations.  

Do treat the terminated employee fairly and respectfully.  

Have a plan in place for terminating employees. Everyone coming to work for you will someday have to be terminated. If you have this attitude, one of being prepared "in case" you have to terminate someone at any time, you'll most likely take the time to have a plan in place for terminating employees.  

Do offer guidance to the employee in transition. Agree to provide good references to solid employees who leave the company. If you have a close relationship with the employee, offer to make some phone calls on their behalf and check in with them periodically.  

Do the firing in a private place. Don't make them "walk the gauntlet" past co-workers. You can use your office, or a closet with good lighting. Just be sure it is somewhere comfortable.  

Do offer to answer the employee's questions. Let the employee know you're happy to help with information about benefits, severance if applicable, or other logistical concerns.  

Conduct the termination face to face. Even if your call isn't being recorded, you should not terminate an employee on the phone. Instead, make plans to have a conversation in person, even if this is inconvenient for you. The employee that is getting fired deserves a face to face meeting so they can ask any questions they may have.  

Consider consulting with legal counsel before doing the termination. Employment attorneys can quickly assess whether or not the employer is in a defensive position to argue cause and if not, the elements of a reasonable separation package.  

Do calculate wages that will be due for the performed work.  

Be professional. Have everything ready and in order, and move smoothly from one part of the meeting to the next. Be organized and follow a script if possible. Have all paperwork ready to sign, a check for the employee if appropriate, and all logistical elements in line ready to go.  

Do read the employment contract. If you have a written employment contract, then this contract should be reviewed before dismissing the employee. If the contract is well drafted, it should contain a termination clause which defines and limits your liability for severance to the dismissed employee.  

Consider writing a reference letter. With this you will help your employee to find new employment. This is not only good for the employee, but will also benefit the former employer as it will significantly diminish the risk of the employee bringing any legal claims against you.   

Ensure that only those who need to know about the termination are informed. News of a looming termination should not be leaked to the affected employee or any other employees in the organization.  

Do allow employee to pack up belongings in privacy. Employers should arrange for a trusted manager or human resources staff person to meet the employee after hours. Do not force the employee to pack up his or her belongings in front of other staff members.  

Do calculate how long will the meeting last. The purpose of this meeting is to inform the employee of the decision, not to debate it or review it. If the basic information is prepared in advance, including written materials, then the job can be done in a relatively short period of time.  

Do let your employee respond. Let the employee speak their mind. Acknowledge any valid points and tell the employee that you appreciate their input and candidness.  

Do end on a positive note. Thank the employee for their contributions and wish them luck in the future. When you finish, stand up and shake their hand.  

Do inform the employee of any rights or entitlements that they may have coming.  

Do make it clear that the decision is final. If you take the position that the decision has already been made, all alternatives have been considered, and all the other managers or owners are in agreement and that you are merely giving this information to the worker, you'll find it easier to keep your cool and keep control of the situation.  

Do collect company possessions from the employee. You'll need to collect any keys, cell phones, company car, company credit cards, or any other property belonging to you from the employee.

DONTS  

Don't terminate an employee on the spot unless the actions are so bad that they require immediate removal from the workplace, such as violence against others.  

Don't worry about being the bad guy. As a manager, your duty is to ensure that the employees are performing their duties accordingly and when you decide that some of them are not doing their job you should react to the benefit of the company.  

Don't do it on the phone. Even if your call isn't being recorded, you should not terminate an employee on the phone. Instead, make plans to have a conversation in person, even if this is inconvenient for you.  

Don't blame others for your decision.  

Don't prolong the termination. Begin the conversation with the situation and clearly state the employee is being let go immediately. Also, make eye contact to show your conviction in the situation.  

Don't send somebody else to terminate the employee you have hired.   

Don't lie. Lies get you in trouble. The person being fired will see right through you and will begin to think about ways he can make you pay for being dishonest. Don't lie to the employee about why you're firing him or her in order to save feelings.  

Don't get into an argument. If the employee requires explanation, fine. But don't debate the issues as that only opens you up to more lawsuits.  

Don't go into a termination meeting without knowing what you are going to say. Allow approximately 15 minutes for the meeting, and have an opening statement prepared that will set the tone for the meeting, briefly explain the reasons for the termination, and the effective date.  

Don't withhold money from their paycheck. You cannot withhold money owed the company from an employee's final paycheck. If an employee owes the company money, consult your employment attorney.  

Don't make promises you can't keep. Don't tell an exiting employee, you'll be happy to provide them a reference when in good consciousness, you know you cannot.  

Don't violate laws. Firing someone for going on maternity leave, military duty or whistle-blowing can only bring you a lawsuit. Familiarize yourself with the laws and make sure you're not leaving the door open for a discrimination suit.  


Don't do this where others can overhear your conversation. Reserve a conference room so you can have a private conversation, even if this means delaying the firing a day or two.  

Don't do it alone. Have a second management person come in and take notes, so you can focus on the conversation. Respect the privacy and confidentiality of everyone involved by meeting in a private area. This gives you an individual who hears and participates in the employment termination in addition to the manager. This person can also help pick up the slack if the hiring manager runs out of words or is unsure what to say or do next.  

Don't Fire Without warning. Unless an immediate, egregious act occurs, the employee should experience coaching and performance feedback over time. Before you fire an employee, try to determine what is causing the employee to fail.  

Don't tell anyone about the termination unless it is on a "need to know" basis. Other employees can spread the gossip and you don't want the person about to be terminated to find out before you get the chance to deliver the news yourself.  

Don't e-mail or text the news. As hard as it may be to deliver it, give the person the respect of doing it in person. Also, terminations via e-mail can be a huge PR nightmare.  

Don't make people sign documents they are not ready and comfortable to sign.  

Don't let the employee believe that the decision is not final. Hopefully, you thought long and hard before scheduling the termination meeting. You have your reasons, if you choose to provide them, reasonably articulated, and a coworker on hand to support you. In fact, tell the employee that the purpose of the meeting is to inform her of your decision, which is final. This is kinder than misleading the employee.  


Don't do it in front of the entire company. As bad as it makes the employee that is being fired publicly look, screaming at them that they've got ten minutes to get off the premises in front of your entire staff actually makes you look even worse.  

Don't give access to the Information system to the employee you have fired.  

Don't take it personally. Don't consider yourself a bad manager, you tried your best to work with them letting them go is simply the last resort. Ultimately, it is not your fault, but theirs.  

Don't make that plan with other employees.  

Don't rush through the terminating meeting.  

Don't make the reasons up to avoid looking bad. If it's a cost-cutting measure, tell the employee that. But if it's just a case of them not being a fit, disguising a firing as a layoff is just plain unethical.  

Don't allow the employee to leave with company property in his possession. Ask the employee to hand over his key, door pass, badge, smart phone, laptop, tablet and any other company-owned equipment or supplies during the termination meeting.  

Don't require from the employee to sign a release for a termination package on the day you fired him. A terminated employee should be allowed at least a full week to consider a termination package, as this gives the employee an opportunity to review the package with his or her lawyer and/or financial advisor.  

Don't interrupt, contradict or try to defend yourself or the company. Arguing will only create resentment and frustration on the part of the employee.    Don't fire an employee without a checklist in hand. This keeps you organized and on track when you need to fire an employee. The employment termination checklist ensures that you cover all appropriate topics during what can be a stressful meeting for all participants.    Don't go into details. You don't need to go into too much detail, but simply state "You're being fired for coming to work smelling like onions," and move on with it.    Don't offer help in finding them new workplace.    Don't fire anyone on Friday or right before a holiday. Maybe the fired employee will need support from any support service and they are closed on weekends and holidays. Also, being terminated earlier in the week allows the person to get a jump-start on finding a new job.    Don't overreact and fire an employee in the excitement of the moment.    Don't apologize, you can only express regret that the employment didn't work out.    Don't take responsibility for the failure. You may want to simply express regret that the opportunity did not work out.

HR Consulting and Cal-Osha Compliance - Two Topics Employers Hate To Discuss, Why?

A little over a year ago I was speaking at a trade association dinner meeting. After about 20 minutes of speaking one of the members of the group interrupted me, and asked me if they could buy a membership.

I told them that it is was not the practice of the association to have guest speakers sell their products during the meeting. I said that I would be done in about twenty minutes, and if anyone wanted to set up an appointment for the next day, I would be happy to do so.


The subject of my discussion that night was Cal-Osha Compliance and HR Consulting. After another five minutes someone else rose up and said "look we just want to buy, we really don't want to hear anymore."Well, I could see they were not going to let me finish, so I asked them what is it that everyone in this room knows, but me? All of them looked at a man that I will call Charlie.



They told me that Charlie had been in the Automotive Repair business for over 30 years, but that he no longer had a shop. Dummy me, I just thought he wanted to retire and drive his motor home around the country with his bride of 30 some years.

I asked the group why was it that Charlie was no longer the owner of his business, and the response shook me to my core. The group informed me that Cal-Osha came out to his shop, and when they were done, he was fined over a $100,000.00, and did not have the money to pay, so he closed his business down.

Times have changed Cal-Osha Compliance is a must, and not only that but every employer needs to also comply with California Labor Laws too. And without a good HR Consultant and a good Safety Consultant you can forget about being on the right side of the Cal-Osha Compliance street.

I can remember when I started my business back in 1997. There really was not much to comply with. Back then employers really did not need to have an employee handbook. Employers did need to have a formally written Safety Program, along with your State and Federal Postings, but if you had those things you were pretty much good to go.

Ah, those were the days of wine and roses, and easy compliance, but how things have changed. The laws have changed so much that you almost have to be an attorney, if you want to comply.

Here is a few things that you must have in place if you are going to be on the right side of the street when it comes to Cal-Osha compliance, and yes you really will need a good HR Consulting Firm.

California Labor Law Issues

1. A Good Employee Handbook

2. Sexual Harassment Training

3. A Good Media Policy

4. Strong, as in zero tolerance Sexual and Other Unlawful Harassment Policies

5. Effective July 1, 2015 You need to have the new California Paid Sick Leave Law explained and spelled out in your employee handbook

6. Your "At-Will" Policy needs to be set up and established and used in a way that will not cost you a lawsuit but help you to win one.

There are more but I am not writing a book, but rather a note. Before we wrap this up let's also address some of the Cal-Osha Compliance issues you need to be aware of.

Cal-Osha Compliance Issues

1. A formally written Safety Program that meets all of the eight standards that have been established by Cal-Osha.

2. A formally written Heat Illness Prevention Program, provided you have employees that work in temperatures of 90 degree heat or more.

3. Regular safety Training topics and if you are in construction that means at least every 10 days.

4. Parodic Inspections of your facilities.

5. Make sure all fire extinguishers are checked and marked off that the arrow is in the center of the meter. Then initial the card that is on the fire extinguisher. If this is not done it is a $250.00 fine per extinguisher.

Failing to have a Heat Prevention Program can cost you $18,000.00. Failing to have a Safety Program can cost you $10,000.00.

Even though compliance may be a challenge please do not do one of the following.

1. Do not bury your head in the sand because of all the complexities of getting and staying in compliance.

2. And, don't just quit because you know you are a good employer and you are always trying to do the right thing when it comes to your employees.

Today there are 1000s of attorneys advertising on YouTube. Educating employees on how to sue their employer.

So, if you think compliance is tough, try explaining why you are not in compliance.

Cestoday, is passionate about your rights as employers. They have several Programs in place that have been Cal-Osha Compliance tested.

How To Win An Overtime Lawsuit

Cases for unpaid overtime arise under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the federal law that generally provides for the payment of time-and-a-half overtime pay.

To win an unpaid overtime case, you must prove three (3) basic elements by a preponderance of the evidence:

(1) that you were employed by the defendant during the time involved;

(2) that your work was engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce or the defendant's business or businesses under unified operation or common control employed at least two persons and was engaged in commerce or the production of goods for commerce and had an annual gross sales of at least $500,000; and

(3) that the defendant failed to pay you overtime required by law.

Engaged In Commerce

The term "commerce" has a very broad meaning and includes any trade, commerce, transportation, transmission, or communication between any state and any place outside the state.

Examples of employees who are "engaged in commerce" under the Fair Labor Standards Act include anyone who uses a telephone, fax machine, the U.S. mail, or computer e-mail system to communicate with persons in another state. Also, it also includes employees who use electronic devices which authorize credit card purchases. As you can see the definition is very broad and determined on a case by case basis.

Calculating Overtime Rate

The Fair Labor Standards Act generally requires an employer to pay its employees at a rate of at least one and one-half their regular rate for time worked in one work week over forty hours. This is commonly known as time-and-a-half pay for overtime work.

An employee's "regular rate" during a particular week is the basis for calculating any overtime pay due for that week. The regular rate for a week is determined by dividing the first 40 hours worked into the total wages paid for those 40 hours. The overtime rate, then, would be one and one-half of that rate and would be owed for each hour in excess of 40 hours worked during the work week.

Exemptions Under FLSAMost employers justify not paying overtime by claiming an "exemption." Probably the most common exemptions are the executive and administrative exemptions, but there are many more.

To receive the benefit of an executive exemption, the defendant must prove that your primary duty was managing the business or department of the business. For example, an executive director would likely be exempt under the FLSA, if they directed the work of at least two or more employees and had the authority to hire or fire other employees, or their suggestions and recommendations as to the hiring, firing, advancement, promotion, or any other change of status of other employees were given a particular weight.

To receive the benefit of an administrative exemption, the defendant must prove that your primary duty was the performance of work directly related to the management or general business operation of your employer and you exercised discretion and independent judgment with respect to matters of significance. An office manager may qualify for the administrative exemption.

When determining whether or not you're an exempt employee it's important to remember that what matters is the work you actually performed, not your written job description. In other words, if your job description states that you're a manager, yet your primary duty is that of a front desk clerk, you're likely non-exempt and owed overtime. As you may imagine, these type of cases are very fact dependent and vary on a case by case basis.

Damages

The measure of damages or money under the FLSA is the difference between what you should have been paid under the Act and the amount that you were actually paid. This is called back pay. Damages are not allowed as a punishment and cannot be imposed or increased to penalize your employer.

Finally, if successful in winning your case under the FLSA, you may be entitled to liquidated damages (double back pay), and reasonable attorneys fees.

How To Protect Your Employee From Being Bullied In The Workplace

Bullying in the workplace is spreading like a bad virus. It is amazing to me that over 50% of all employees are being bullied in the workplace.

Workplace bullies come in all shapes and sizes and includes men and women. Along those lines it is also both men and women who are being bullied or harassed in the workplace.

The effects of being the victim of such actions is varied, some experience depression to the point of having to see a therapist. The victim over time can lose their self-confidence and develop a loss of self-esteem.

Bullying in the workplace is now considered to be a hostile work environment. And, while this is against the law most victims will not take legal actions.

Many times workplace bullies will try to demean by constantly ridiculing the work and the work habits of the victim. For both men and women being bullied in the workplace is not to be taken lightly.

Below is a list of things that could be considered in the workplace:   

Attacking the person's character by spreading ugly rumors or gossip that is not true.   

Excluding the victim from the group, for the purpose of keeping them isolated.    Intimidating a person.   

Undermining or deliberately impeding a person's work.   

Being Physically abusive.   

Taking away given areas of responsibilities for no reason.   

Changing work structure and guidelines at the drop of a hat.   

Imposing deadlines that can't be met for the purpose of causing failure.   

Failing to provide the necessary information or giving the wrong information that will cause the person to fail.   

Intruding on a person's privacy by pestering, spying or stalking.

It is the employers responsibility to make sure that the company has a solid Anti Harassment, and Anti Hostile Workplace Policy.

If your company handbook does not include these policies than you are not creating a safe work environment for your employees.

If your management team is not enforcing the good policies that you have written in your employee handbook then you are not creating a healthy work environment for your employees.

In addition to establishing a strong anti harassment policy it is good to send out your management team to seminars that will help everyone to better understand exactly what bullying in the workplace is and how it can be identified.

This kind of harassment is simply bad for the company, it destroys the moral fiber of a company and destroy employees drive and desire to succeed and improve themselves.Any employer who is not proactive in this area is hurting the company's reputation and profits, not to mention contributing to a criminal offense.

These last words are strong, but a human life is very precious and needs to be preserved not demeaned.

Unemployment and California Traffic Court Reform

The Traffic Court Vice Tightens to Produce Unemployment.

A single mom driving a car built in the previous century pays a $100 ticket plus $393.00 in assessments. Now the system begins to tighten like a vice on the hapless mother.

She may lose her job if she appears in Court to challenge the ticket. She must pay the ticket in full before a court date will be set. She instead elects to make installment payments, but if she misses a payment, her license is suspended. She misses a payment. Her license is suspended. Now day care and getting to work become major obstacles. She loses her job. In the meantime, another citizen, a wealthy retiree, who always wanted to be a lawyer, pays the fine, and takes a day to prepare his defense. He appears in court, beats the ticket (the officer does not appear), and has his fine refunded.

This system is a revenue generating machine that operates in truth as a taxation upon the poor, and an exemption for the rich. Worse, it operates as a severe punishment for persons like the young single mom who lost her job.

Traffic Court Reforms Pushed by All 3 Government Branches in Coordinated Effort to help the Unemployed.

Fortunately, our Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye has focused on reforming this unequal access to justice. Also, Governor Brown, with the cooperation of the California legislature, has enacted a law taking effect October 1, 2015 allowing people to apply for debt relief of a 50% reduction in debt and a waiver of all civil assessments. The poor can get an 80% reduction. Going forward, the system itself has been radically reformed:   

Anyone [expect DUI's] making payments on their traffic fines can get their licenses back immediately - with no need appearance before a judge;   

The fines and penalties no longer need to be paid in advance as a condition of a bench review of the violation - this means the judge can make adjustments in the fine and timing of payment;

See Copy of Senate Bill 405.Traffic Court Until Now Has Inflicted Undue Punishment on the Poor by Adding Unemployment to Their Misery.

According to the sponsor of the traffic fine reform bill, Bob Hertzberg [San Fernando Valley] four million Californians have had their licenses suspended for non-payment of traffic fines or failure to appear in court. Of these, 42 per cent lost their jobs and 88 per cent suffered a loss of income.

There are valid and graduated reasons for suspending a driver's license, including evidence of multiple violations and driving under the influence. A driver's license is a privilege, not a right. See DMV Reasons for Suspension. But using it as a sledge hammer upon the poor to reap billions in taxes is unconscionable.

Unemployment Can be Addressed By Reforming the Continued Practice of Suspending Driver's Licenses.

Still to be considered: the practice of suspending a license for failure to pay a traffic violation fine. The failure to pay is usually a matter of inability to pay. The system is not working, and in fact, is harming Californians and the California economy. The better practice would be to keep low income workers employed, off welfare, and to use the tax system to collect taxes instead of the traffic courts.

Age Discrimination Causes Loss of Social Security Benefits

OLDER WORKERS AND SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS

You've seen your paycheck whacked every pay period with money pumped into the black hole of Social Security, while hearing that the Trust Fund isn't going to be there after the tsunami of Baby Boomers. Your impulse is to take the money at age 62 and run. But maybe you should resist that impulse.

WHY OLDER WORKERS SHOULD WAIT

For every year you delay taking Social Security benefits past age 62, your benefits increase 5%-8%. Reason enough wouldn't you say to delay early retirement? Remember, we're talking benefits for life. That hopefully is a long stream of income at 5% to 8% increase. This is especially important as you live longer and likely rely primarily on your social security payments to survive.

Your benefits are tax-free until your annual earnings plus ½ your annual benefits exceed $25,000.00. If you're working full time or even part time past age 62, you're exposing your benefits to taxation. [Think of "tax-free" as a return on investment - it would be hard to do better in the market.]

So why do slightly more than ½ of retirees elect to take their benefits at 62? Who knows for sure, but maybe its "pay-in" fatigue coupled with pessimism the Trust Fund will survive. I suspect illness, disability, and job loss are factors. But if you can avoid early social security withdrawal, do so. The immediate losses of early retirement are more certain than the longer-term speculation about the Trust Fund.

AGE DISCRIMINATION INFLICTS DAMAGE TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFIT STREAM.

One sad consequence of age discrimination is that older workers without a large retirement portfolio may be forced into early retirement. Those losses can be significant. Those losses can be calculated against the older worker's retirement plans had the age discrimination not caused an early employment termination. More insidious is that age discrimination burns at both ends of the age candle. Finding new work at comparable pay is also impeded by age discrimination in hiring.

The True Extent of Maternity Discrimination

I was taking my friend Tracey and her Siamese cat to the vet recently, and as we were driving along the seafront she turned on the radio to listen to Women's Hour. We couldn't believe what we were hearing. The presenter was asking Yvette Cooper about whether or not she felt that she could become the leader of the Labour party job because of her husband, Ed Balls When did a woman's husband begin to define her and her career prospects?

It seems that more and more women are opting to have babies later on in life due to various reasons. I can tell you from my own experience that the financial burden that having a baby brings is often cited as a major factor. Women are now much more focused upon developing their own careers than having children as well compared to say 15 - 20 years ago.

After being so alarmed at what I was hearing, I decided to ask around my own group of friends to see if they had ever experienced maternity discrimination in the workplace. Most of them were able to recall a story about themselves or friends of theirs who had been treated unfairly due to being pregnant. I was disturbed to hear all sorts of examples of sexism and discrimination. Many of them had to endure all kinds of negative comments upon returning to work and even claimed that the opportunities available to them in the workplace had also diminished upon their return.

Despite the strides that we, as women, have taken towards equality in the workplace, it seems that maternity discrimination is still alive and well in 2015. Young women are apprehensive about having a baby due to the fact that taking maternity leave is frowned upon and rarely allows women to simply pick up from where they left off. The sad reality is that 54,000 women a year lose their jobs due to having a baby. It seems as though I am not the only one and even Yvette Cooper has spoken out about the exact same thingi.

It is unbelievable that such attitudes towards women still exist in 2015. My hubby and I have recently been talking about us having a baby together. I had been looking forward to having a little one of my own before discovering the extent of the attitudes facing women today. Hopefully now that the true extent of the discrimination facing pregnant women has been made public, more can be done to ensure that all women are treated with fairness and equality whether they are pregnant or not.

California Labor Code Violations Produce Big Damages Through Private Attorney General Act [PAGA]

A Fictional Account of Labor Code Violations

Disclaimer: This story is completely fictional without reference to any particular person, company or employee. Any resemblance or name approximating a real individual or company is purely coincidental.

A Background Story of Multiple Labor Code Violations Leading to Penalties.

Melinda worked for Busy-Body Industries to clean homes. Busy-Body had a written employment agreement with Melinda and 2,000 other home cleaning persons in California. The agreement provided that all the Busy-Body employees were confirm their appointments the previous day by calling customers on a schedule delivered to the employee at the beginning of the week. The employees were also to call in just before and after each cleaning. Busy-Body required its employees to have mobile phones, and to subscribe to unlimited minutes through the wireless provider of their choice. Busy-Body paid a standard $2.00 per day to each employee for what Busy-Body designated as Mobile Phone Expenses.

Melinda and all other housecleaners used their mobile phones at least six times per day for Busy-Body related business. Melinda's monthly unlimited mobile phone service cost $130.00 per month. Using her phone for company calls did not increase her bill.

Busy-Body also required its employees to purchase their cleaning supplies, and paid them a standard 40.00 per month as a set reimbursement based on a 12 month historical average for its 2000 employees. However, some employees worked in areas where the square footage of a luxury home required more cleaning agents than persons cleaning middle class neighborhoods.

Busy-Body collected the cleaning person's tip as part of the pre-paid pricing and charged the employee a $5.00 per transaction fee for collecting the tips. Employees were not permitted to receive tips directly from customers. Busy-Body used this method to track tips in order to make individual tax withholdings and contributions for each employee.

Busy-Body also required each of its employees to launder and press their uniforms Employees not maintaining dress codes. As proof that uniforms were properly clean and pressed, Busy-Body required employees to scan and deliver a separate cleaning bill each week, but did not reimburse for these expenses. An employee not submitting an expense voucher for cleaning was fined a $15.00 "failed inspection" fee.

Also, Busy-Body employees are required to pay for their own vacuum cleaners and replacement bags. They are allowed to use the vacuum cleaners for personal use. Busy-Body considers the vacuum cleaner a tool of the trade, similar to tools owned and used by a carpenter.

A cleaning person when dispatched left his or her home to go directly to her first appointment of the day. There was no Busy-Body "home office" that cleaning people drove to or from when making their appointed calls. The Busy-Body corporate office is located in Tulsa, Oklahoma, with no office locations elsewhere in the country. Once a month, employees were required to attend a tele-conference which provided training, company news updates, and company feedback on customer demands, expectations, and satisfaction levels. Employees were expected to attend these conferences after their regular work hours while at their home computers, usually after 6:00 p.m. They were not compensated for this time, or the phone and internet expense incurred as part of these monthly meetings.

When Melinda questioned the Company practice of being fined for the "failed inspection" fee when she cleaned and pressed her uniforms at home on her own time, her manager said to her, and all on the conference, that the dry cleaning service was the only way the company could track that the company "brand" was being presented by each employee."Then we should be paid for the expense of the dry-cleaning," Melinda said."You paid for the uniforms, and can wear them for personal use. It is not a company expense," her manager had told her during the phone conference."Melinda was upset with this answer, and didn't back down: But you picked the clothing, and it has our company logo on the shirts.""The logo is very attractive," her boss told them. You should be proud to wear it for personal use.

Within a week after her comment, Melinda's employer called her to say her services were no longer needed, and tor return her company documents and uniform. Melinda pressed for an answer why she was being terminated."I've never been written up. My customers all love me. This isn't fair.""You're an at-will employee," the H.R. Director told her during the phone conference. "We don't have to have a reason."STORY ANALYSIS TO IDENTIFY THE CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE VIOLATIONS and "PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ACT" ["PAGA"] IMPLICATIONS:

California Labor Code Violation: Personal Cell Phone Use for Business on An Unlimited Plan

This issue has been resolved in California by the Cochran decision. The employer cannot defend itself by the argument that it cost no more for the employee to use the phone. The court shifted focus to the benefit received by the employer, and required a factual inquiry into the average likely ratio of personal to employer use of the airtime. The employer owed the employees a percentage reimbursement of personal expenses incurred for the employer's business.

Then the question is whether $2.00 per day for every employee is a fair and reasonable calculation of the likely personal to business use ratio. An employer is allowed in California to use an optional method of estimating costs instead of paying the exact dollar amount based on individual expense reports but there must be a close approximation based on evidence of real costs. An employer may want to follow this optional approach because of the difficulty and time associated with individual reporting.

In this instance, if the unlimited plan costs $80.00 per month, and the employees use their personal plans between 30% to 50% of the time for business, and a random check of business calls on the phone records support that range, then 40% could be a reasonable and fair reimbursement, as any one employee in any one month could use the phone more or less than the midpoint.

Melinda's typical use is six times per day business use at 10 minutes each or 60 minutes per day. She uses the phone for personal reasons about 10 times per day at 20 minutes each or 200 minutes. The ratio of business to personal is 60:200 or 30%. At $130.00 flat fee, she should be getting $39.00 per month reimbursement. $2.00 per month is clearly inadequate.

California Labor Code Violation: Cleaning Supplies and Equipment.

Busy-Body pays a standard reimbursement rate $40.00 per month for cleaning supplies based on a 12-month historical average for its 2000 employees. Is this formula supportable by evidence showing that individual employees are being adequately compensated?

The cleaning cost appears reasonable based on the depth of the data over 12 months, but Busy-Body may need to sub-classify its employees into the "big home" neighborhood group and the "moderate home" group, as each set of homes will have its own "cost of supplies." The more refined and specific the formula, the more likely it will be upheld as a legally sufficient approximation of actual costs.

The vacuum cleaners are tools owned by the employees who retain them in their personnel possession and are free to use them for personal purposes as well. They likely are not reimbursable expenses. But what about replacement bags and belts related to wear and tear for employer benefit? Those costs are arguably reimbursable because the volume of bag use for business is so much greater than for personal use. Busy-Body employees, for example, routinely use and dispose of at least one bag per home cleaning. Each employee cleans between 1 or 2 homes per day five days per week. Busy-Body could be left holding the bag for unreimbursed expenses owed to 2000 employees, including penalties, and attorney's fees.California Labor Code Violation: Imposing Costs for Collecting Tip Income

Passing this cost onto the employee would be illegal. In California, tips belong exclusively to the employee. Businesses routinely collect and distribute these tips. Most customers add the tip not as a separate payment to the employee, but as a component of the overall authorized card charge. Tip collection and administration is a cost of business to be absorbed without offset to the employee. Moreover, Busy-Body is required by law to treat the tip income as regular wages and subject to UI, ETT, SDI, and PIT withholdings. Busy-Body must therefore include the deductions in its paystub itemization. This itemization would include a category of "tip income," or like wording. Failure to report, distribute and withhold all have tax and California Labor Code penalties for non-compliance.

California Labor Code Violation: Work Clothing Laundry Expenses

California employers who require their California employees to wear apparel unique to the employer's brand by such features as color, style, design, or logo are must pay the costs to obtain and maintain the work related clothing. If the employee advances the cost, the cost must be promptly reimbursed.

In California, uniform cleaning and maintenance other than simple home laundry must be reimbursed to the employee. If the employee is required to spend time at home to meet specific care requirements of the employer, such as ironing, the "reasonable value of the time" used can be paid as an extra pay "allowance." If the employee is required to incur outside laundry and pressing services, as might be the case with a dry cleaner, the actual employee expense must be reimbursed.

Busy-Body employees are required to wear clothing having the company logo, and are required to pay a "fine" if the clothing is verified as clean and pressed by a drycleaner. Busy-Body is required to reimburse these costs. Further, imposing a "fine" for non-compliance is an improper deduction from wages unrelated to an employee's willful or grossly negligent damaging of company property. The fine operates as a "charge back" against earned wages in violation of Labor Code Sec. 221.California Labor Code Violation: Travel and Commuting Expenses

Busy-Body employees have no "home-base," that is, no place they predictably report to work, such as a staging area or corporate office. Instead, their schedule takes them from their private homes to a scheduled customer location often different each work day. The usual rule is that commuting expenses are not reimbursable travel expenses, but Busy-Body employees have no "commute" from home to first work location. All their work related driving expenses are therefore reimbursable. To reinforce this conclusion, the Busy-Body corporate office is out of state with no satellite offices.

There are 2000 Busy-Body employees across the country, each with a different set of distances actually traveled. Busy-Body must reimburse actual individual travel expenses, portal to portal, for each employee based on expense vouchers submitted. California case law recently allowed employers the option to pay a standard travel expense payment without regard to specific recorded expenses but only if the formula has a rational and proximate relation to actual expenses. Most companies use the prevailing IRS mileage reimbursement rate as an acceptable rate to cover gas, insurance, and maintenance. This rate, coupled with data showing the average travel range in various regions of the country (requiring Busy-Body to sub-classify its employees) could satisfy California law and reduce employer administrative costs.

Melinda's Case for Wrongful Termination -- Retaliation

Melinda is an employee "at-will" but that status is irrelevant to the likely reason for her firing in this case. She had a good work record. Her first friction with Busy-Body was when she questioned the propriety of laundering Busy-Body required uniforms. She was fired a week later with no explanation. The firing was illegal because Melinda protested an issue covered as a "fundamental right" in California: payment of wages and expenses. California allows this "cause of action" to be heard by a jury if Melinda reasonably believed the violation of law occurred, and in some manner complained to the employer about the illegal practice. The short time between between complaint and firing, coupled with her good work record, is strong circumstantial evidence that Busy-Body's motive was to punish or silence Melinda.

Strength in Numbers: California's Private Attorney General Act [PAGA].

California has a unique law that appoints private attorneys to prosecute cases on behalf of the State of California, Department of Industrial Relations, Labor and Workforce Development Agency. This Act is labeled California's Private Attorney General Act [PAGA].

PAGA is so powerful because it gives an enforcement energy that was almost completely lacking given limited agency resources. This lack of resources, and the widespread scope of abuses, led the California legislature to basically allow private attorneys to be "Attorneys General" for the good of the public. A powerful incentive of the law is that these private attorneys can recover penalties from employers, and recover attorney's fees incurred in prosecuting the case. The recovered penalties are divided between the State and the employees.

But one aspect of the case unlike a state action is that an employee brings the suit on behalf of multiple other employees who are invited to join the lawsuit. The corpus of money recovered is then held to be claimed by the employees after the State gets its share. Many PAGA cases will settle before trial, and the State is often willing to compromise its share of the total recovery to less than the statutory 75% in order to facilitate the settlement.

The Private Attorney General must notify the Labor and Workforce Development Agency ["LWDA"] in detail concerning the nature of the proposed civil action, and the employer must be notified before suit with the opportunity to correct the alleged violations. If the LWDA declines to sue on the matter, and the employer does not present timely "cure" of the violations or conditions, then the individual employee represented by private counsel may proceed on behalf of the State of California and the employees to collect the penalties. Labor Code Section 2699 defines a hefty penalty: for most employers the fine is $200.00 for each aggrieved employee for each pay period in which a violation occurred. There is a one-year statute of limitations from the date of the last violation in a series to collect penalties. 26 pay-periods times $200 = $5,000 per year per employee X 2000 employees =$10,400,000.00.

The Technical Issues Related to a PAGA Case.

Multiple questions have been raised by defendant Employers and the Courts concerning the interpretation and future of PAGA. Some of the more pressing ones:   

Does PAGA have to meet class certification requirements applicable to the standard Class Action case.   

Can Courts require a PAGA employee named in the action to go to arbitration to determine the merits of his individual action to determine if he is a typical representative of the issues to be addressed in the PAGA case. [Undecided by a Court of Appeal, but Trial Courts are in fact "managing" PAGA cases this way.]   

How much discovery is required at what stage of a PAGA case for a court to determine the scope of the PAGA claims? [It appears that the Courts are following the trend begun in class action certification motions to include evidence obtained in an individual arbitration proceeding to determine the probable merits of the claims, but there has been no appellate decision published on this question as yet.] Discovery will be accelerated on the individual claim to meet the burden of proving that claim in Arbitration.   

What is the effect of the 2015 California Supreme Court decision [Valencia] on the future of PAGA cases? If the Federal Arbitration Act applies to require an individual to arbitrate his individual claim and to waive class action participation, does that same pre-emption by federal law apply to a PAGA case? Employees argue not: that it is the State of California, and not the employee, who is represented by the "Private Attorney General."   

What is the standard of proof for PAGA damages when each employee may have been damaged somewhat differently, but within a probable range of minimum to maximum loss? The answer has been given in the "Duran" case. Statistical evidence is admissible to arrive at an acceptable probable amount of damages despite individual employee variations if the probable number is arrived at an expert following generally accepted statistical methods with adequate sampling. Whatever the method adopted by the Court, it must allow the Defendant fair opportunity to attack the methods used or the sampling relied upon by the employees.

Department of Labor Issues Proposed Fiduciary Rule on Investment Advice

Americans' retirement savings in both traditional defined benefit pension plans and individual account balance plans, such as 401(k) programs have been protected by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) since 1974.

The rules regarding retirement investment advice have not significantly changed during the intervening decades, even though the shift has been away from defined benefit plans and more toward self-directed IRAs and 401(k)s.

For several years the DOL has been working on a revision to its fiduciary rules to close which some perceived as a loophole that allowed potential conflicts of interest between a retirement investment advisor and plan participants. The intent is that retirement advisers always put the best interests of their clients above their own financial interests. This is particularly important when an advisor provides an investor with guidance on prudent investment options in stocks, bonds, other securities, insurance and banking products, or is managing the account or IRA on behalf of its owner.

On April 14, the DOL released its draft rules in the form a 1,000+ page "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (NPRM). The current proposal is seen by many in the industry as an improvement on changes suggested by the DOL in 2010. The earlier plan was withdrawn for further analysis after some stakeholders, including the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) and members of Congress, expressed concern that all of the issues were not fully addressed.

Fiduciary Definition and Differing Protections

The basis of the DOL proposal stems from who is considered a fiduciary, or trustee, and differences in fiduciary protections. For example, a fiduciary is required to impartially manage a traditional pension or defined benefit plan to make sure there will be sufficient funds to pay benefits under the plan. In a 401(k) plan, the employer is one of the fiduciaries, choosing investment options that will be offered to employees participating in the plan. All ERISA fiduciaries must act solely in the best interests of the plan participants.

However, IRA and other retirement investors are missing this type of assurance. Many investors look to financial advisers for their expertise in choosing investment products. These advisers-who are currently broadly defined under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code-can be anyone from brokers to insurance agents, registered investment advisers to financial planners, and are all subject to differing standards.

Many advisers are alleged to have conflicts of interest when offering investment advice, since they can earn payments from recommending certain funds that may not be the most prudent choice for their clients. Also, consumer advocates claim that hidden fees and disclaimers can result in high costs and lower returns for investors.

The proposal revises the longstanding regulation on who is an ERISA fiduciary to more retirement advisers, investment managers and broker dealers and further protects retirement savings. The DOL believes it has put forth a proposed regulatory package that is balanced in terms of increasing protections while minimizing disruptions to good market advice.

The proposed DOL fiduciary rule seeks to accomplish the following:• Require more retirement investment advisers to put their client's best interest first, by expanding the types of retirement investment advice.

• Make more advisers fiduciaries and ensure they are held accountable to their clients if they provide advice that is not in their clients' best interest.

• Preserve access to retirement education.

• Distinguish "order-taking" as a non-fiduciary activity.

• Carve out sales pitches to plan fiduciaries with financial expertise.

• Commit the firm and adviser to providing advice in the client's best interest.

• Warrant that the firm has adopted policies and procedures designed to mitigate conflicts of interest.

• Disclose any conflicts of interest-like hidden fees often buried in the fine print or backdoor payments that might prevent the adviser from providing advice in the client's best interest-clearly and prominently.

Feedback Encouraged

Because this proposal will affect millions of IRA savers and retirement participants, the DOL is welcoming feedback during this period of public comment. This process provides many opportunities for the public to contribute including written comments and oral testimony. The proposal is subject to change based on this input.

In May, the DOL granted a 15-day extension to its original 75-day comment period, giving stakeholders a total of 90 days to record their feedback. Public hearings will take place during the week of August 10.

In Summary

After reviewing all the comments, the DOL will determine what to include in a final rule and in the final exemptions. Even if the DOL ultimately issues a final rule and final exemptions, they will not make it effective immediately and probably not until sometime in 2016. Finally, it's important to keep in mind that while this proposal expands the universe of who is a fiduciary, ERISA's fiduciary duties are long established and well known.

Owed Back Wages? Call Employment Law Firms Today!

Nearly nine million Americans lost their jobs during the Great Recession and its aftermath. Those who were fortunate enough to stay off the unemployment line were expected to work longer hours, often for the same, or even less, pay. Few complained. Most felt blessed they had a job to go to at all. But a funny thing happened when the recession ended. Instead of rewarding them for their hard work and dedication during those difficult times, most bosses continued to push their undersized staffs just as hard. Workers are finally fighting back in court with the help of employment law firms.

A Recent Trend

The number of American workers who are presently suing employers under federal and state wage-and-hour laws reached a record high in 2014. Although each case is different, the major bone of contention is that American businesses have benefited from increased productivity, while most employees have not. In the overwhelming majority of these cases, the worker sues to recover the overtime wages to which they are legally entitled.

The Law

Businesses are required to pay time-and-a-half the regular rate to most employees who put in over 40 hours per week. It doesn't matter if they are part-time, full-time, temporary, or salaried employees. However, because they don't want to pay these additional wages, some bosses misrepresent the extent of state and federal rules regarding overtime pay. They might, for example, ask their employees to work off the clock or beg them to do them a personal favor by staying late.

Most workers were willing to do their bosses these favors when times were tight, but not any longer. They now want the money to which they are legally entitled. While some bosses agree to pay these back wages as soon as they hear from employment law firms, others play defense.

Who Is Entitled?

All hourly workers, no matter their job title, description, or immigration status, are entitled to overtime pay. Executives and other white-collar workers may be exempted from this rule if they are managers or administrators who are expected to work long hours and are compensated accordingly with higher annual salaries. Other employees with hours that are difficult to track, such as sales reps and technology workers, may have a hard time claiming overtime or may not be entitled to it at all.

The Bottom Line

U.S. productivity, or output per labor hour, rose by four percent in 2010, which was the largest increase in recent memory. That was a full year after the Great Recession ended! In other words, instead of hiring additional employees, bosses continued to squeeze more output from their undersized staffs. The practice continues to this day. Technology giant Oracle recently agreed to pay $35 million in overtime pay to workers it had intentionally misclassified as administrators!

Labor Practices

As we mentioned, not every employee is entitled to overtime pay. To find out if you are eligible for additional remuneration, contact reputable employment law firms ASAP. Lawyers at these firms specialize in this growing area of legal practice and know local and federal labor laws inside and out.

What To Look For

A simple web search will return an impressive list of employment law firms in your area. Do not simply select the first name on the page. Take your time and visit their websites. If you like what you see, give them a ring. Most reputable attorneys offer free initial consultations and only get paid if you receive the money that is owed you.

Laborers Union - An Overview

An association proposed to stand for the shared interests of workforce in negotiations with a company over wages, working conditions and time limit. Labor unions are mostly industry-specific and to be further familiar in manufacturing, construction, transpiration, mining and the non private sector.

Employers and laborers seem to perceive employment on a vastly different approach. Subsequently how can both sides arrive at any type of agreement? The response lies in unions. They have cast a part in the worker-employer exchange of ideas for centuries, however in the former few decades several aspects of the business atmosphere have been altered. Keeping this in mind, it's necessary to recognize how unions play roles into the modern business environment, along with what part unions occupy in the present economy.

The influence of labor unions lies in their two core tools of influence: limiting labor supply as well as escalating labor demand. Several economists evaluate them like cartels. Through combined bargaining, they bargain with the employers about the paid wages. Laborers Unions requests for a privileged wage, however this can lower the hours demanded by employers. Given that an elevated wage rate equals to less labor activity per dollar, they mostly face problems while negotiating superior wages and will often concentrates on increasing the labor demand in its place. They can utilize several different techniques to raise labor demand:

• Demand for minimum wage boost. Minimum wage raises the labor expenditure for employers by exploitation of low-skilled workers. This lowers the gap among the wage rate of low-skilled laborers and high-skilled ones. However, high skilled are taken by the union often.

• Raise the marginal productivity of low skilled and unskilled labors which can be attained through training.

• Lobbying for firm immigration regulations limit the raise in labor supply, mainly of workers from overseas. A restraint in the supply of low-skilled laborers, what is diversity labor, rises up their wages.

Unions boast an exclusive legal spot and sometimes they function like a monopoly since they are resistant to antitrust laws. Since unions manage, or can wield a superior influence on, the supply of labor of a specific industry or company, they can force non-union laborers from decreasing the wage rate. They are capable of this as legal guidelines grant a certain height of protection to activities performed by union.

The expression "bargaining" might be deceptive, since it is perceived as people haggling at a marketplace. However, the objective of bargaining collectively is to perk up the worker's status while still maintaining the employer's business. The bargaining affiliation is continuous, not just an affair.If unable to negotiate, or not content with the collective bargaining results, they might initiate a strike or work halt.

Unions have without a doubt left mark on the economy, plus maintain to be major forces that shape the commerce and political setting. They are currently in a variety of industries, including manufacturing to the government, and also assist skilled and unskilled labors in attaining improved wages and working environment

Do You Need An Employment Lawyer?

An employment lawyer is a legal representative who specializes in employment-related cases. If you believe that you have been wrongfully terminated, sexually harassed, treated unfairly and discriminated against, an employment attorney can guide you in your rights as an employee.

In addition to this, employment advocates often handle labor-related disputes, including issues regarding financial discrimination, worker's compensation, wages, and other types of injustices. So if you have recently been a victim of such discrimination or injustice, you should immediately contact a competent employment attorney. The lawyer will advise you in such a situation. Also, he or she will defend you at the court of law. Furthermore, he/she will handle all the paperwork and present arguments in your favor to win the case.

Does an Employer Need an Employment Lawyer?

As an employer, you also need the services of an attorney. While it is the responsibility of the employer to handle most of the employment issues, some matters are quite tricky and difficult to deal with. Thus, you will need the help of a lawyer conversant with matters employment. An employment attorney helps you stay abreast of changing labour laws, which may be difficult for you to understand or interpret in your own. He or she can review any agreements you entered with your employees, such as severance agreements and employment contracts.

He/she can review personnel policies or employee handbook to ensure legal compliance. In addition to this, a lawyer protects you against violating laws pertaining to occupational safety & health, pay checks, family leave and overtime pay just to name but a few. An employment advocate can also advise you when it comes to making critical decisions such as whether dismissing an employee is lawful and what steps you can take to reduce the risk of a potential lawsuit.

An Employment lawyer will offer you the best defense against the injustice done to you. Whether it is a case of harassment by the employer or a case of worker's discrimination, a competent and experienced lawyer will be able to defend you in the most professional manner.

Such a legal expert may also represent you to negotiate for compensation amount because if you don't hire his services you might get cheated by the employer. For example, an employer might trick you to get less compensation than you deserve.

When Is the Best Time to Contact an Employment attorney?

Many claims pertaining to employment law have deadlines or time limits often known as 'statutes of limitations'. That is why it is always recommended to file your case sooner rather than later. Even so, it is very important to choose an experienced and competent lawyer to represent you.

Things to Consider

There are several things to be considered when choosing an employment advocate. These include time involved, cost, location, etc. A lawyer can be found through referral services provided through various professional law associations or through friends and family. Information is also available through search engines on the internet or through the Yellow Pages. You can check advertisements of employment lawyers in newspapers and magazines.

So, you can see that there is a great deal of benefits of hiring an experienced employment attorney. If you feel you have a few claims to make against your employer or employee, then the best thing to do is to contact an employment lawyer in your area to discuss the issues.

How A Workers' Compensation Attorney Can Alleviate the Pain of the Process

Back in the old days, employees weren't provided compensation for workplace-related injury and illness, even if the incident was a result of employer negligence. Fortunately, workers' compensation programs protect employees throughout the United States today. If you've been injured on the job, knowing you have the option to file a claim for wages and medical expenses may put your mind at ease. The system can be difficult to navigate alone, but with a workers' compensation attorney, the road to recovery can be much smoother.Understanding Your State's Laws

Every state is different, and frequent legislation makes for regular changes that can be hard to follow. Very specific guidelines are in place for workers' compensation rights and responsibilities, including, but not limited to:

- How long you have to file a claim

- How much you're entitled to in medical benefits and wages

- Social Security entitlement

When you're ill or injured, trying to find your way through the claims filing process can be all the more difficult. Having a lawyer who knows the ins and outs of your state's system may help streamline the process for you and make you feel more comfortable with the outcome.

Understanding of the Legal System

One of the most obvious benefits of having an attorney is that he or she will have an understanding of the legal system needed to ensure that your claim is handled properly. If you're told that your case can't be accepted by your employer or feel that you might be entitled to more than you're being provided, your legal representative can investigate and determine whether the claim was dealt with legally and fairly.

Should I Obtain a Workers' Compensation Attorney?

Regardless of your specific circumstances, you have the right to consult with a lawyer about your claim. However, if your situation is severe enough to have a potentially long-lasting effect on your ability to work and/or if you question the legality of your employer's handling of your claim, you are strongly recommended to obtain a workers' compensation attorney. Some of these circumstances might include:

- Injuries and illnesses causing irreparable damage, leaving you unable to work at all or in the same manner as you could prior to the injury or illness

- Conditions that require operation(s) or other medical treatments, leaving you unable to work for extended periods of time

- A disability prior to being injured or becoming ill

- A suspicion that your employer wrongfully denied your claim or is mishandling it

The greatest advantage to obtaining a workers' compensation attorney is simple: He or she will be your advocate when you need it most. Being out of work due to a workplace illness or injury is not just a struggle medically; it can make it difficult to pay your bills and care for yourself and your family. In many instances, seeking a lawyer to help you handle your claim and represent you when necessary can be your best course of action.

7 Things You Need To Know About Florida's Private Whisteblower Act

The Florida private sector Whistleblower's Act, F.S. §§448.101-448.105, prohibits employers from taking an adverse employment action against an employee because the employee objected to or refused to participate in any activity, policy, or practice of the employer, which is a violation of a law, rule, or regulation.

1. Covered Persons: An "employer" under the Florida Private Whistleblowers Act means any private individual, firm, partnership, institution, corporation, or association that employes 10 or more persons. An "employee" means any person who perform services for an employer for wages or other renumeration, but does not include an independent contractor.

2. Statute of Limitations: The statue limitations for filing a Florida Private Whistleblower case is two

(2) years after discovering that the alleged retaliatory personnel action was taken, or within four

(4) years after the personnel action was taken, which ever is earlier.

3. Administrative Exhaustion: There is no requirement that you exhaust your administrative remedies; an employee may file a complain in court. In other words, you do not need to file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC or the Florida Commission on Human Relations to bring a Florida Private Whistleblower's Act case. Therefore, there is no need to wait at least 180 days before starting the litigation process, as opposed to a case brought under Title VII or the Florida Civil Rights Act.

4. Remedies: If you're successful in your Florida Private Whistleblower's Act case, the court may order:

(1) an injunction restraining continued violation of the act,

(2) reinstatement of the employee to the same position held before the retaliatory personal action, or to a quart equivalent position,

(3) reinstatement a full fringe benefits and seniority rights,

(4) compensation for lost wages benefits and other renumeration, or

(5) any other compensation damage is allowable by law.

5. Attorneys Fees: A court may award reasonable attorneys fees, court cost, and expenses to the prevailing party of a Florida Private Whistleblower's Act case, which means the employee could have to pay the employers attorneys fees, if he or does not prevail.

6. Written Notice: In order to be protected under the Whistleblowers' Act for complaining to an outside agency, an employee must first disclose, in writing, the unlawful act to the employer.

7. Testify As a Witness: An employee is protected under the Whistleblower's Act for providing testimony or acting as a witness under subpoena related to an alleged illegal act of the employer.

Kentucky Workers Comp: An Overview of Things You Should Know

Worker's compensation was designed to provide medical benefits and wage replacement for those injured while employed. It is also designed to protect workers from diseases developed or contracted due to workplace exposure.

Every employer is responsible for providing worker's compensation insurance, or to become self-insured. Certain employees, however, are exempt from this coverage, including: agricultural employees/employers, domestic workers, some religious organizations, and those who voluntarily reject the coverage.

While every employer is responsible for providing coverage, there are certain limitations and rights specific to each state.

Worker's Comp Coverage in Kentucky

In Kentucky, worker's compensation is understood as the "exclusive remedy," which means that the protection received for any sustained injuries forces employees to surrender their right to sue. Employers cannot be penalized by employees in a civil court case. Benefits received can include:   

Partial wage replacement   

Medical treatment coverage, and   

Payment for restoring an injured worker to sufficient employment.

In the case of a death-related injury, employers pay a lump sum towards the employee's estate allowing burial expenses to be paid. This payment amount changes annually, however income benefits are given to the spouse, as well as other surviving dependents.

Because Worker's Compensation can be a disagreeable subject, many disputes are resolved during a compromise settlement involving both parties. If a solution is not determined, parties will have to litigate the claim through a process beginning with an application of claim adjustment, filed under the Department of Worker's Claims. Once this paperwork is complete, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), is assigned to the case to facilitate a benefit review conference.

During the benefit review conference, both parties have the opportunity to discuss the positives and negatives of the case, while working towards a settlement. If the claim does not reach a settlement, a formal hearing will be scheduled within 30 days by the Administrative Law Judge.

After the hearing, a decision must be released within 60 days, either awarding or denying medical benefits or income assistance. The solution may include rehabilitation benefits, if necessary. Through this process, the outcome is determined with the help of witnesses and medical professionals.

As a result, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) is unable to require the employer to pay for income benefits in a lump sum. If any party disagrees with the decision, he or she may file an appeal. This goes through the ALJ once again, and if it is appealed further, it may go to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, and finally to the Supreme Court.

In Kentucky, worker's compensation insurance coverage is issued to every employee in order to remain on the job, and to assist with any work-related medical expenses. For business owners interested in purchasing workers comp insurance, certain agents specialize in offering this product.

Similarly, if you are in need of legal assistance in this area, certain attorneys concentrate on workers compensation litigation. When it comes to workers comp, it is important to understand your rights and responsibilities. Keep in mind that these vary considerably, state by state.

Oral Agreement by Directors of a Company to Share Profit With a Person: Effect of Failure of Company

A (Managing Director) and B were the only registered directors and shareholders of a Nigerian Company. The company decided to increase its business prospects especially in the public sector by involving C who was expected to use both his expertise and political contacts to gain business advantage and expansion for the company. A and B orally agreed with C that profits made by the company shall be shared equally with C and that C would be made a director of the company. On the basis of the said agreement, C contributed greatly in securing a contract for the company which made A commend C's effort vide a letter.

Consequently, C was designated and instructed to act as the Director of Business Development (DBD) of the company and other efforts were begun to ensure that C was made a director of the company as orally agreed by all the parties. But there was never any written resolution passed to make C a director neither was the register of directors of the company amended.

Consequently, the company secured a contract where it made a total profits of N60,000,000 (Sixty Million Naira only). Shockingly, A and B had refused to share the said profits with C.

INTRODUCTION

The scope of this write-up is to: identify the attendant legal issues arising from the scenario; and appraise the identified legal issues in the light of the extant principles of law (statutory and judicial). Also, a brief attempt will be made to advise C on the strength or otherwise of his case.

LEGAL ISSUES

1. Whether C was in law a director of the company.

2. Whether C can be said to be a partner with A and B.

3. Whether C was an employee or worker in the company.

4. Whether C is entitled to share in the income made by the company

LEGAL POSITION ON ISSUES

1. Whether C was in law a director of the company:

Generally, the question of: who is a director of a company is more of a question of law than fact. Section 244 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) describes 'a director of a company registered under this Act is a person duly appointed by the company to direct and manage the business of the company'. Undoubtedly, the directors' roles are as fundamental to the wellbeing of a company just as blood is to the survival of the human body. Perhaps, that is why company statutes all over the world make special provisions about the procedures of appointment and removal of a director.

In the light of the foregoing, one can safely say that C was not a director of the company because he was never validly appointed so. Though, C was designated as a Director of Business Development (DBD) of the company but nothing was done to amend the necessary registers of the company at the Corporate Affairs (CAC) registry. In other words, the designation of C as the DBD without filing necessary amendments in the company's register of directors was a mere expression of intention which was never perfected in law.

2. Whether C can be said to be a partner with A and B:

According to Section 3, of the Partnership Law of Lagos State, partnership is the relationship which subsists between persons carrying on a business in common with a view to profit. From the foregoing statutory definition, one can say a partner is a person who carries on business with such other partners. It is imperative to examine the various statutory rules that determine the nature of partnership. Section 4 of the Partnership Law provides thus:

(a) ''Joint tenancy, tenancy in common, joint property, common property or part ownership does not of itself create a partnership as to anything so held or owned whether the tenants or owners do or do not share any profits made by use thereof.

(b) The sharing of gross returns does not of itself create a partnership whether the persons sharing such returns have or have not a joint or common right or interest in any property from which or from the use of which the returns are derived.

(c) The receipt by a person of a share of the profits of a business is prima facie evidence that he is a partner in the business, but receipt of such a share or of a payment contingent on varying with the profits of a business, does not itself make him a partner in the business; and in particular -

(I) the receipt by a person of debt or other liquidated amount by installments or otherwise out of the accruing profits of a business does not of itself make him a partner in the business or liable as such;

(ii) a contract for the remuneration of a servant or agent of a person engaged in a business by a share of the profit of the business does not of itself make the servant or agent a partner in the business or liable as such;... ''From the foregoing, it is clear that partnership is a question of express agreement between the partners because the law will not ordinarily presume the existence of partnership between persons doing business together. It then suffices to say that: a mere contract made with a servant or person for remuneration or sharing of company's profits does not ipso facto make such servant or person a partner.

It is noteworthy to state that C's case falls within the contemplation of Section 4 (c) (ii). The legal implication of this is that C was a servant of the company who was entitled to share out of the income of the company. But he was not a partner in the strict legal sense.

3. Whether C was an employee or worker in the company:

It is imperative to examine first the Labour Law angle of the relationship that existed between the company and C before considering the strict contractual aspect of the relationship. Accordingly, Section 91 of the Labour Act, 'contract of employment' means an ''agreement, whether oral or written, express or implied, whereby one person agrees to employ another as a worker and that other person agrees to serve the employer as a worker''.

In the same vein, the Act defines a worker as ''any person who has entered into or works under a contract with an employer, whether the contract is for manual labour or clerical work or is expressed or implied or oral or written, and whether it is a contract of service or a contract personally to execute any work or labour... ''In the case of Iyere v. Bendel Feed & Flour Mill Ltd., the Supreme Court of Nigeria described a contract of employment as follows:''... a contract of employment connotes a contract of service or apprenticeship, whether express, or implied, and if it is express, whether it is oral or in writing''.

Hence, C was a worker or an employee of the company because he was indeed working for the company. In other words, there were enough instructions and directions given to C which point to the fact that C was working for and on behalf of the company when he worked as the DBD of the company.

From another point of view, the facts at hand can also be addressed from the strict contractual agreement sense. It is trite in law that parties are bound by the terms of their agreement. In the case of Akanmu v. Olugbode, the Court held as follows:''The elements of a valid contract are offer, acceptance, consideration and intention to enter into legal relations... Once the offer is unconditionally accepted, a valid contract has come into existence''.

Also, in the case of Dragetanos Const. (Nig.) Ltd. v. F.M.V. Ltd & Ors., the Court of Appeal held as follows:''... it is appropriate and necessary to restate the time-honoured principle and ingrained in the Law of Contract that, 'pacta conventa quae neque contra leges neque dolo malo inita sunt, omni modo obsevanda servanda sunt', in order words, contractual agreements which have neither been fraudulently nor illegally entered into by parties, must in all respects be observed or enforced''.

Also, in the case of Nicon Hotels Ltd. v. Nene Dental Clinic Ltd, the Court of Appeal held as follows:''An agreement voluntarily entered into must be honoured in good faith. Equity looks at the intent and not forms and will always impute an intention to fulfill an obligation''In the light of the foregoing, it is safe to assert that a contract can be established between the company and C as evident in the various instructions given to C by A, the Managing Director of the company. Of course, the actions of the parties show clearly that there were offer, acceptance, consideration and intention to create a legal relation among all the parties. Hence, the decision of the company and the subsequently joint efforts made by all the parties in securing a contract constitute a subsisting and enforceable contract among the parties.

4. Whether C was entitled to share in the income made by the company:

This issue deals primarily with the determination of remuneration of C. Though, the friendly oral understanding between the parties about profit sharing was not contained in any written 'Profit Sharing Agreement', profits shall be shared equally because parties had orally agreed it to be so shared. However, it is to be noted that there may arise an evidential issue if A and B deny their oral agreement. It is also imperative to add that: assuming without conceding that there was no agreement (oral or written) among A, B and C, equity will still allow C to share in the profits based on C's sweat equity.

Therefore, it is safe to say that C is entitled to his own share of the company's income because of his sweat equity (he contributed actively in the contract from where the company made N60m). It was indeed wrong for A and B to solely convert all the income made by the company.

ADVICE FOR C

In the light of the foregoing, C can either sue for breach of contract of employment, or breach of contract simpliciter which can be deduced from the circumstances of both the actions and relationship of the parties. As answered by the statutory provisions above, the question of what constitutes a contract of employment is a question of law. Of course, the exact remuneration of C is equal proportion with A and C of the total profits made by the company from the contract carried out by A, B and C.

Considerations for the Professional, Breastfeeding Mom

It's already 6:45?! I haven't even packed my pump bag yet!" I scramble to get the diaper bag filled with back up outfits, bottles for my five-month old and a juice box and fruit snacks for my two-year old, all for the fourteen minute drive to daycare.

I finally manage to get boots, coats and hats on, and the girls and their fully stocked diaper bag into the car. Now its 6:55 and I rush back to the kitchen to get the ice packs into the pump cooler pack, fill it with empty pump bottles and shove it into the bag with the pump and all the necessary tubes, flanges and attachments. There's no time for breakfast, so I take a quick gulp of water to try and calm my growling stomach. I rush to the car, start the engine and the green digital clock on the dash confirms; it's 7:05 and I'm officially twenty minutes behind schedule. I curse my pump bag for slowing me down and think how much easier life will be when I don't have to pump anymore. But that thought also makes me a little melancholy; I don't want my youngest to grow up so fast! My two-year old snaps me out of my thought as she shouts "Mommy! Mwah! Go bye-bye!" and I just have to laugh. Well, twenty minutes late is better than thirty minutes late!I'm one of the many working moms that struggle to balance my family life with my work life. I truly enjoy my job as an attorney in the healthcare field. In my current position I'm lucky to be surrounded by other working moms who understand that on most mornings it is next to impossible to be on time. They also understand (because they've each been there) that there will be a few times during the day that I need to step away from my desk to pump. I appreciate my current "pump-friendly" work environment even more because I haven't always been so lucky.

When I had my first child and returned to work following a nine-week maternity leave, I was working in a small financial organization comprised mostly of men in their mid-forties to late fifties. None of them could relate to having young children at home, nor could they understand what was like to balance work life with the demands of a family with two working parents. And when it came to the subject of breastfeeding and pumping, there was absolutely no patience for the time I needed to be away from my desk.

Thankfully, the federal law has recognized the need to set minimum standards for employers in this area. My employer was required to provide me with sufficient break time and a private location (not a bathroom) to pump, and to do so for up to one year following the birth of my child. Generally speaking, any employer covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") is required to provide this reasonable accommodation to nursing, working mothers. If the employer has less than fifty employees and is not subject to the FLSA, they would have to show that compliance with the nursing mothers break time requirement would impose an undue hardship on their business. As with my first employer, who was not subject to the FLSA, I venture to guess it is easier to just provide space and time for pumping than to try and argue an undue hardship. Compliance with the law, however, doesn't mean the professional environment will be friendly to nursing mothers.

When I returned to work after my first child, I was pumping three times during the work day, with one of those times being over the lunch hour. I felt incredible pressure to hurry through each of those pumping sessions, even though I typically needed just 15 minutes each time. Nonetheless, when my then-boss would see me grab my pump bag to head up to the empty office to pump, I could see the general look of annoyance on his face. It was incredibly frustrating to have my professional work and reputation colored (in the eyes of my co-workers) by my choice to breastfeed my baby after returning to work. I felt guilty not being home with my child and guilty for being away from my desk to pump!

Rather than simply tolerate the tension, I broached the subject with my boss and found that much of it stemmed from the fact that there wasn't an understanding of my pumping needs. I chose not to offer a detailed explanation about the mechanics of breast milk supply (we both would have been uncomfortable with that) but instead reviewed with him the actual time I was using to pump, illustrating that altogether it was less than an hour per day. I further pointed out that for me, that hour really was a wash since I had long ago given up taking a proper lunch break. I found that by setting expectations as to my daily (pumping) time needs, and for the breastfeeding timeline in general (I chose to wean at 6 months, which is another highly sensitive topic under which I encourage every mother to do what is right for themselves and their child), we were able to clear up any misconceptions as to my focus while at work.

In light of my experience, I would offer the following recommendations to all working and nursing mothers:

1. Be assertive with your employer as to your space and time needs and remember, the law is on your side;

2. Don't compromise your choice to breastfeed, or your choice to do so for any length of time;

3. Take comfort in the fact that taking time during the work day to pump allows you to maintain the nursing bond with your baby while you're away from home;

4. Whenever possible, pack the diaper bag and your pump bag the night before!

UK Government Wants Businesses to Do More for New Parents

Shared parental leave to level the gender playing fieldAs of 1 December this year, fathers now have the same rights as mothers when it comes to taking leave from work following the birth of a child.

For all babies due after April 2015, employers must offer shared parental leave of up to 50 weeks, rather than the father's usual fortnight.

Fathers use holiday allowance for maternity

In a move that has been warmly welcomed by a generation of working mothers, parents can now choose how to split their paternity leave between them, opening the door to a much more equal division of childcare. Indeed, a recent survey by Mumsnet revealed that, prior to these changes, some 39% of fathers had had to use up paid leave, in order to support their partner and new baby during the postpartum period.

Now, it will be possible for up to 50 weeks' leave and 39 weeks pay to be shared in any combination, aside from a compulsory 2 week period immediately following the birth, which must be taken by the mother. The message, it seems, is getting through: recent research by the outsourcing firm ADP found that up to a third of expectant fathers surveyed plan to take advantage of the new legislation.

Shared parenting rights

There is little doubt, however, that a cultural sea-change in attitudes will not happen overnight. Employers are concerned about the effect these changes will have on their work forces and fathers fear losing money and status if they leave their jobs for months on end.

The Scandinavian model, however, is proof that shared parenting rights can become the norm when government and businesses are working together. In Sweden, Norway and Iceland, a percentage of leave is reserved exclusively for fathers at around 80% of their salary; the so-called "Daddy quota."Far from creating pressures, the head of one of Norway's biggest employment associations affirms that it, in fact, "strengthens the man's position in the family and the woman's in the workplace".

In order for the new laws to make a real difference here, therefore, the Government is calling upon employers to take positive steps: making employees aware of their rights, aligning notice periods for pay and leave to make the system simpler and maintaining the right for parents to return to the same job after their leave.

In return, they can expect to gain from a system which allows them to keep talented women in the workforce and have a more motivated and productive staff as a whole.

Injured on the Job? Three Questions for Your Construction Accident Lawyer

Construction work is widely known as very dangerous work. You may be required to work with heavy equipment or climb atop high scaffolding to get the job done. If you ever suffer from a work-related injury, there are many options that you have in order to be made financially whole. A construction accident lawyer can work with you and your employer to get the maximum amount of money that you will need to pay for your expenses as well as any other costs that stem from your injury. Here are some questions you may have about the process.

Is Workers' Compensation an Option?

Just like working for any other industry, people with injuries suffered on a construction site are entitled to be covered by workers' compensation. Workers' compensation pays for your medical expenses and lost wages while you are recovering from your injury. It will also pay you for a period of time if you are permanently disabled due to the injury you received. It requires you to prove that you were hurt in the course of completing an act at your job. There is a limitation on how much you will receive, however. This is because this program is very clear-cut and requires no outside litigation, saving the company money.

What if Workers' Compensation Isn't Enough?

In the event you are hurt so severely that you are out of work for an extended period of time, or even permanently, your construction accident lawyer may advise you to sue your employer on top of receiving other benefits. Your ability to bring a civil lawsuit against your company will be dependent upon the circumstances of your injury as well as the state you live in. The nature of construction work provides many possible liable parties that could be a part of your injury. Your injury could stem from an architect's faulty design or from an engineering oversight. When there are multiple entities that are potentially liable, a construction accident lawyer will work to find out who is responsible in order to initiate a lawsuit.

Can an Equipment Manufacturer be Held Responsible?

Some injuries may not be caused by a person or group of people on the job site, but by faulty equipment. If this happens, you can sue the manufacturer of that piece of equipment to help pay for your damages. This lawsuit will be deemed a product liability lawsuit rather than personal injury or negligence. You would be required to prove that the piece of equipment was in bad condition or dangerous when it left the manufacturer. You will also be required to provide proof that you were using the piece of equipment in the correct manner.

The nature of this work is inherently dangerous, but you are still entitled to a safe workplace free from hazard. You should contact your construction accident lawyer as soon as you are injured to ensure that you receive any and all benefits that are rightly owed to you.