Happy Thanksgiving!

Posted on November 20, 2005 by Christopher McKinney
We are gone this week for the Thanksgiving holiday. But don't worry. We will return next week with a full tummy and lots of employment law goodness. Until then, we thought we would take a short stroll down history lane regarding the pending holiday. What follows is George Washington's1789 Thanksgiving Proclamation. Accoring to historians, shortly after the Thanksgiving Proclamation was written it was lost for over a hundred years. It was apparently misplaced or attached to some private papers in the process of moving official records from one city to another when the capital was changed. However, it happened the original manuscript was not in the official archives until 1921 when Dr. J. C. Fitzpatrick, then assistant chief of the manuscripts division of the Library of Congress "found" the proclamation. It was at an auction sale being held at an art gallery in New York. It was written in long hand by Wm. Jackson, secretary to President Washington and was signed by George Washington. Dr Fitzpatrick purchased the document for $300.00 for the Library of Congress, where it now resides:

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me "to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted' for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d dy of October, A.D. 1789. (signed) G. Washington

Tags:

Surface Transportation Assistance Act

Posted on November 16, 2005 by Christopher McKinney

The Workplace Fairness Website has added an excellent information page on the Surface Transportation Assistance Act ("STAA"). The STAA is a little-known federal law that protects those who face discrimination or retaliation for trying to obtain compliance with commercial vehicle safety laws. Congress recognized that too many Americans are killed in accidents caused by sleepy drivers, shoddy maintenance, and failure to secure loads and that employees in the transportation industry are often best able to detect safety violations and yet, because they may be threatened with discharge for cooperating with enforcement agencies, they need express protection against retaliation for reporting these violations. The STAA empowers truck drivers when they to refuse to drive in violation of a commercial vehicle safety regulation or otherwise refuse unsafe dispatches. It also protects truck drivers and commercial transportation employees who make complaints to the employer, or the government about violations of commercial vehicle safety regulations.

For more information on the statute, its remedies, enforcement procedures, statutes of limitations, etc. look here.

Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination, Age Discrimination, San Antonio, Employment Lawyer

Tags:

So Why DO You Blog?

Posted on November 15, 2005 by Christopher McKinney

I don't often write about blogging on this blog but this is a question that I have been getting from other lawyers with increasing frequency over the last 6 months or so. Apparently Michelle Golden over at Golden Practices gets this question a lot too and dealt with it at a recent Blog Conference put on by blog gurus Dennis Kennedy and Matt Homann. Golden notes the following compilation of what various lawyers at the conference indicated were their reasons for blogging:

1) clients and recruits appreciate "insight" into the lawyer's brain (all the better to see if there is a "fit")2) keeps us more in tune with our practice interests because we are doing more reading and thinking about these things"3) the younger generation is a generation that is "growing up with blogging" and they can relate to us because we've been doing it too4) it gives me a chance to write often, but less formally5) lots of media attention, interviews and speaking opportunities on my topics6) some lawyers claim their blogs are responsible for generating up to 30% of their revenues7) seen as an expert in my area, higher level of respect8) other benefits cited: personal reward, passion, helping people with information.

All excellent reasons for an endeavor that does not appear to many, at first blush, to be a highly productive endeavor. For me, the prime reasons for blogging are client generation (Yes, it works) and creating a real reason for me to stay on top of new developments in my area on a daily basis.Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination, Age Discrimination, San Antonio, Employment Lawyer

Tags:

Scotus Issues Opinion in IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez

Posted on November 10, 2005 by Christopher McKinney

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq. ("FLSA"), as amended by the Portal-to-Portal Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 251-262 ("Portal Act"), an employee must be compensated for the time their employer requires them to spend donning and doffing protective gear. In the combined oral argument for Tum v. Barber Foods, Inc. and IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez, the Supreme Court considered an important related question?whether an employee is also entitled to compensation for time spent waiting at stations where required safety and health equipment is distributed, donned, and doffed, and traveling to and from these stations to work sites at the beginning and end of each workday. This week the Court gave us the answer. In a nutshell, the Supreme Court?s decision in these consolidated cases is that the donning of essential clothing and equipment that is integral to the performance of an employee?s job marks the beginning of the employee?s compensable workday. Once an employee dons protective clothing or equipment, the workday has begun and continues to run until such time as the employee actually doffs that protective gear or clothing at the end of the workday. Of course the converse is also true: any time spent by employees walking to the locker room prior to donning such equipment/clothing or waiting in line to receive same is generally not compensable under the FLSA.Here is the Court's opinion.Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination, Age Discrimination, San Antonio, Employment Lawyer

Tags:

EEOC Files Class Action Sex Harassment Suit Against Fox News

Posted on November 8, 2005 by Christopher McKinney
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a class action lawsuit against Fox News alleging a pattern of sexual harassment, retaliation and discriminatory pay and promotion practices at the conservative news outlet. Here is an excerpt from the factual allegations of the suit:

Fox, including through its Vice President Joe Chillemi (?Chillemi?), sexually harassed and subjected Weiler and a class of similarly situated female employees to a hostile work environment because of their sex. Chillemi routinely used gross obscenities and vulgarities when describing women or their body parts (referring, for example, to women?s breasts as ?tits? and declaring that something was ?as useless as tits on a bull?). He routinely used obscenities and vulgarities with women employees that he did not use with male employees (such as telling women that they had put his ?cock? or ?dick? ?on the chopping block?). Chillemi routinely cursed at and otherwise denigrated women employees and treated them in a demeaning way (including telling women not to be a ?pussy? but to ?be a man?, and referring to women as being a ?bitch?). He made a number of derogatory comments about pregnant women (such as regularly stating that a pregnant woman had ?tits? that were ?fucking huge? and like ?cannons? or ?melons? and the on-air talent?s breasts needed to be ?covered? or not shown when the pregnant woman was being filmed). In addition, at a department discussion about a segment on sexism in the workplace, Chillemi said that in choosing who to hire ?if it came down between a man or a woman, of course I?d pick the man. The woman would most likely get pregnant and leave.? Women in the Fox Advertising and Promotions departments supervised by Chillemi were also referred to in a derogatory way by a supervisor as his ?Promo Girls.? Defendant Fox has discriminated against Weiler and a class of similarly situated female employees in the terms, conditions and privileges of their employment, including assigning women primarily to freelance positions with less benefits, less advancement potential and less job security and not appropriately assigning women to full staff positions

And here is a copy of the lawsuit. This suit comes on the heels of the network's settlement of a sex harassment suit brought against it and its star anchor Bill O'Reilly in 2004.Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination, Age Discrimination, San Antonio, Employment Lawyer
Tags:

An Initial Look at Alito's Employment Law Record

Posted on November 4, 2005 by Christopher McKinney

OK, here is a first look at Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito's record. As you might expect, we will be focusing on his civil rights and employment law opinions here at the Bulletin. Unlike former nominee Myers and, to a lesser extent, John Roberts, Alito has a 15-year record of votes and opinions on civil rights issues. His record is so long in fact that it will be several weeks before anyone will really be in a position to give a comprehensive analysis of his work.
The Washington Post has conducted an initial review focusing mainly on Alito's dissenting opinions. According to the paper:

In civil rights cases, Alito has agreed with the court's majority most of the time, The Post's review found. When he disagrees, he is not prone to inflammatory language or frontal challenges to Supreme Court precedent. Still, when he has taken a dissenting stance, Alito repeatedly has set a higher bar than his fellow judges for plaintiffs to prove that they were discriminated against -- and sometimes even to get a trial.

The Post noted that Alito has written six major dissents on cases involving employment discrimination, siding squarely with the employee only one of those times. Here is a link to the article. And here is a link to a brief biography of Alito along with a collection of links to more analysis.
Obviously, we will have much more on Alito in the coming days and weeks.Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination, Age Discrimination, San Antonio, Employment Lawyer

Tags:

Guns in the Workplace - Isn't this a No-Brainer?

Posted on November 3, 2005 by Christopher McKinney
Interesting post over at George's Employment Blawg today regarding guns in the workplace. George discusses efforts by the gun lobby and several state legislatures to limit employers' ability to ban guns from the workplace. In my humble opinion, this is just plain nuts! Employers have enough to worry about in maintaining a safe working environment these days without being forced to allow employees to come to work armed and dangerous. In any event, George provides an interesting discussion and links to several articles both pro and con that provide even more thought on the issue.

Here is some extra stuff:

NRA Press Release launching national boycott against ConocoPhillips because Conoco had the audacity to lobby against a state law that would forbid employers from firing workers that violate company policies banning guns on their premises. Here's a story regarding the issue.Story regarding proposed Florida bill that would allow employees to bring guns to work.

Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination, Age Discrimination, San Antonio, Employment Lawyer

Tags: