Below is a review of the posts on Facebook and LinkedIn from the past week. You can check out the full posts by clicking on the links.
The post on Sunday 9/8/2024 told us where the 2024 presidential candidates stand on employment issues (as of 8/16/2024). The post contained a summary of where former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris — and, in some cases, their respective running mates, Sen. JD Vance and Gov. Tim Walz — stand on labor and employment issues.
DEI
Trump – Trump prohibited some diversity and including training for the federal workforce and employees of federal contractors during his time in office.
Harris – Harris’ legislative history offers little insight into her stance on workplace DEI initiatives but as governor of Minnesota, running mate Walz has voiced support for diversity efforts generally. he also signed a state pay transparency mandate into law – a move often aimed at improving pay equity.
Immigration
Trump – has long taken anti-immigration stances and, as president, took steps to restrict immigration to the US. At that time, employers expressed frustration that what Trump did could impede hiring efforts. And what did Trump’s running mate, Vance, recently say about trade? See the post.
Harris – Harris indicated she’ll be touch on border security but has also worked to address “the root causes of migration” from Northern Cental America alongside private-sector partners like those noted in the post. As California’s attorney general, Harris focused on transnational criminal organizations as detailed in the post; as San Francisco district attorney, she worked to crack down on wage theft affecting migrant workers.
The candidates also have set positions on job creation, labor, minimum wage, and paid leave. They are all detailed in the post.
TAKEAWAY: The next president will have many agency appointments to make that can significantly affect your workplace – think carefully before you cast your vote.
The post on Monday 9/9/2024 noted employee has last laugh after managers renege on promise and deny flexible working hours. But was this a legal last laugh?
When employers start neglecting employees’ needs and force them to work in hostile environments, it can backfire. That’s what happened with this employee. He shared that he was working in a supervisory role as a charge nurse for three years. With great reviews and consistent raises and performance bonuses, he asked his managers if he could have a more flexible schedule if he started a master’s degree. What he meant by that (it was not time off) is in the post. The employer agreed because there would be no loss of productivity and it would be gaining a nursing practitioner for the system. A year after starting his program, he got divorced. He told the employee assistance program (EAP) about it and got therapy. His managers also advised him to apply for FMLA leave due to their concern for his mental health. He was approved for FMLA leave of up to forty hours per week for a year.
When things got hectic and out of control for him, the employee stepped down from his role and started working as a staff nurse. That did not sit well with his main manager. What she did at that point is in the post. When his practical rotations were about to begin, he asked his managers for a flexible schedule as they had agreed to, but they reneged. What they did instead is in the post. But then the employee remembered that he had FMLA leave approval and could take the time whenever he wanted. So what did he do? He started to call off every morning he needed for his rotations without notice to his managers – what that resulted in is in the post. He also had PTO time saved up, so he got paid for the FMLA leave he took. He finished his rotations using that same procedure and went to a different hospital system after graduation. Then after a few years he was rehired in his old organization as a provider. How his old manager responded is noted in the post.
Query: while what the employee did worked for him, was it legal? Did he properly use the FMLA leave for which he’d been approved?
TAKEAWAY: Employers aren’t the only ones who need to abide by the terms of the law – know the law and your rights and obligations.
The post on Tuesday 9/10/2024 told us the EEOC nets $400K for employee with cancer allegedly fired 10 days after taking medical leave. Yep, that sounds suspicious. And the EEOC claimed Pilot Air Freight attributed the worker’s termination to his short tenure even through the company retained other employees hired after the plaintiff.
The EEOC filed suit against Pilot Air Freight in federal court in 2021. It claimed that Pilot eliminated the plaintiff’s job about 10 days after he took medical leave. Pilot’s alleged basis for the termination is noted in the post. But the EEOC alleged that several employees hired after the plaintiff were not terminated AND Pilot posted a job description identical to the former worker’s roughly six months after the worker’s termination.
And now Pilot has agreed to settle; part of the terms include a stipulation that the company will provide a one-time mandatory live training program to HR employees on reasonable accommodations for disabilities. Pilot’s response to the allegations is in the post (along with report and study findings when an employee with cancer is in the workplace).
On a similar note, in April, the EEOC reached a $325,000 settlement with a car dealership it alleged had fired a sales executive, the alleged basis for which is in the post. The EEOC also settled with a real estate group in 2018 after suit was filed; the basis of that suit is also in the post
TAKEAWAY: the only basis upon which you should treat employees in the same position differently is if they perform differently; otherwise stay out of hot water and treat similarly-situated people the same, including those in a protected class.
The post on Wednesday 9/11/2024 told us how to handle a (condo or) homeowners association dispute the right way. People seem to have a love/hate relationship with homeowner associations (HOAs). Some love them, others will never live in an HOA again. The difference often boils down to disputes between residents and the HOA, some of which end up being costly. The best way to handle such a dispute is calmly and coolly. How NOT to do it is touched on in the post. So what are some things that can be done to effectively handle an HOA dispute and work toward a win-win resolution?
First, understand the governing documents (Declaration, also referred to as the CC&Rs [the covenants, conditions and restrictions], Bylaws and Rules & regulations]. They are all part of the framework by which the community conducts itself. The Declaration is at the top of the hierarchy (behind only applicable state law). What it usually covers is noted in the post. The dispute might involve enforcement of a rule that you never knew about but is documented in the paperwork you signed (or that was recorded and given to you).
Another way to act in case of dispute with an HOA is through open communication. It might be helpful to contact the HOA’s board or management agent to express your concerns. How you should do that, and what to seek, are in the post.
It is also useful to attend HOA meetings and gain information that might resolve a dispute. There are other benefits to this too as noted in the post. And what about mediation of the dispute? That might be an option, or it might even be mandated in the Governing Documents (again, read them to know what they require and what they allow or prohibit).
What is often another option (and should seriously be considered) is to seek legal guidance. An attorney who is well-versed in applicable community association and other state law, and can help interpret the Governing Documents, will be well worth the time and money you invest. But also keep in mind the things noted in the post when you do seek legal advice.
There are other things too that can be done to handle an HOA dispute. They are discussed in the post (and should not be surprising).
In conclusion, handling a homeowners association dispute requires a combination of communication, collaboration, and, if necessary, legal understanding.
TAKEAWAY: The goal of a condo or homeowners association is to keep the community as nice and friendly and in as good a condition as it was to make people want to move there. A community association lawyer can be a huge asset in meeting that goal.
In the post on Thursday 9/12/2024 we asked: Can HOA or condo association Board issue $10K fine for violation? Associations are charged with keeping the community in good condition, but what happens when huge fines make residents feel like they are sinking? That might be happening to residents of the association in the post who are faced with fines of $10K per violation.
Millenium Tower made headlines in 2020 for engineering problems and subsequent structural issues (including those serious things noted in the post). For example, one time a window came loose from the 49th floor, slammed against the building, and sent debris into neighboring buildings! While nobody was hurt, local authorities ordered owners to install stronger support arms for the windows. Now, 4 years later, that is finally being done. In the meantime, though, the HOA is trying to prevent further damage via fines. Until the window work is complete, it is issuing fines up to $10,000 for residents who leave their windows open when they are not home or during wind events. And there is more than just the fines as noted in the post. So given that, the question is whether an association can issue such a high fine.
We know that communities come in different shapes and sizes, including single family homes and towers like the one in the post. And buying a home in the community means membership in the association and the responsibility to pay periodic assessments and comply with the Declaration (CC&Rs, the covenants, conditions and restrictions), Bylaws and Rules/Regulations. Those documents give some authority to owners and much to the Board which is charged with compliance and fulfilling the association’s obligations.
So given the association’s role, are high fines like Millenium Tower is imposing valid? The post explains why they might be. And if the fine does not violate the association’s governing documents of applicable state law, then they are probably valid. Different states have different laws that apply to condominium and homeowner associations.
What if an owner does not agree with something the association has (or has not) done? There are some suggested steps to take. First is to read the governing documents to see if there is a process in place to deal with questions or disputes. That is explained a bit more in the post. If that doesn’t resolve the question/issue, and if not already part of the process, try and meet with the Board (or a part of it) and management agent to work toward an answer/resolution. And if that doesn’t work, there are other options as noted in the post (and our post from yesterday, Wednesday 9/11/2024).
TAKEAWAY: Condo and homeowner associations boards have wide latitude to operate and maintain the community in the way they best see fit – that might include a schedule of fines for certain (in)actions. Questions or issues should be discussed with a community association attorney before they become a mountain.
The post on Friday 9/13/2024 noted a former employee alleges racial discrimination against major travel center chain. Christopher Henson filed the complaint in federal court on August 30, 2024, against Pilot Travel Centers, LLC, doing business as Pilot Flying J.
Henson, an African American, claims he faced continuous race-based discrimination and harassment during his employment as a Maintenance Laborer from November 7, 2023, until his termination on March 27, 2024. He details the derogatory racial slurs and unfair treatment by his supervisors and colleagues which he claimed were aimed at him. Specifics are in the post.
Henson’s complaint alleges that starting in December 2023, instances of racial discrimination began to escalate. By January 5, 2024, Henson reported being subjected to constant derogatory racial slurs (such as is noted in the post) in the presence of managers who did nothing to intervene. Henson says that on January 15, 2024, he addressed the issues over the phone with his manager after being scheduled for work without adequate rest — which never happened to Caucasian colleagues.
Henson says that he also faced false accusations of possessing a firearm on February 3, 2024, and that those accusations were investigated and proven baseless. But that did not end things related to the accusations; see the post. Then on March 10, unfounded allegations surfaced accusing Henson of involvement in drug-related activities. Why he thinks those came about is also in the post.
After all of that, Henson requested a transfer and submitted a Paid Time Off (PTO) request on March 21 because he expected the transfer process to take about three weeks. But he was surprised when Pilot instead terminated his employment on March 27.
The legal bases of Henson’s suit are listed in the post. He asserts that Pilot Flying J’s actions resulted in significant harm including loss of employment and income as well as mental anguish. What Henson seeks by way of damages is also detailed in the post.
TAKEAWAY: do not retaliate when an employee complains about alleged harassment or discrimination or tries to get it resolved; there is liability for that, even if there is no underlying harassment or discrimination. Engage a good employment lawyer.
Finally, in the post yesterday 9/14/2024, we learned that court rules Market Basket must pay $135K in age discrimination suit. This was after a jury trial in a case in federal court. Let’s take a closer look.
Rodney Martinez, a part-time employee for over seven years, sued DeMoulas Super Markets, Inc., the parent company of the Market Basket chain, claiming that Market Basket promoted younger employees over him. The statutes under which Martinez filed his suit are listed in the post.
Martinez was in his 50s when he began his employment with Market Basket in 2012. He worked full time hours as a produce associate but did not get commensurate benefits. He also says that he was not promoted. Instead, Martinez, who has a graduate degree in education, was paid a mere $11.50 per hour in 2019. Martinez says that he asked for a full-time role on numerous occasions; what Market Basket did instead is described in the post.
After trial, the jury came back with a verdict in favor of Martinez awarding him almost $55K in back pay and over $20K in compensatory damages. The judge then awarded liquidated damages and enhanced compensatory damages as noted in the post (so the total award is pretty hefty). It is not surprising that Market Basket disagrees with the verdict and award; it’s statement on that, and why Martinez was not promoted, is in the post.
TAKEAWAY: Employers are allowed to operate their business the way they see fit, but when that runs afoul of legal protections, including age discrimination, the law will step in and it can get very costly. Just do it right from the start.
York, Pennsylvania 17403