Posts

Posted on

Wage Theft Crisis

Wage theft crisis, requires employment lawyers experienced in class actions, wage and hour violations, labor law.

The Hidden Theft: Billions Lost in Unpaid Wages

Injustice is not always visible – especially when companies subtly dip into their employees’ hard-earned wages. A recent study from EPI unraveled how employers are unlawfully paying less than the minimum wage to their employees – a subtle form of theft that is costing workers billions of dollars every year.

The Impact of Wage Theft: By Numbers

According to the survey data, around 2.4 million workers from the top ten most populous U.S. states are victims of this ongoing wage theft, losing roughly $8 billion annually. On an individual level, affected workers lose an average of $64 per week, accounting for almost a quarter of their weekly earnings. If these workers were paid correctly, 31% of those struggling with poverty would be lifted above the poverty line.

The Crime Wage Theft Hotspots

Minimum wage violations are more prevalent in some states than others. Florida leads the pack with a violation rate of 7.3%, followed by Ohio (5.5%) and New York (5.0%). However, when it comes to the highest amount of lost wages due to these practices, Texas, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina top the chart.

The Most Affected Demographics

Unfortunately, this unscrupulous practice is more likely to affect certain groups. Our young workforce (ages 16 to 24), women, people of color, and immigrant workers often report being paid less than the minimum wage. Part-time employees, service industry workers, and unmarried workers, especially single parents, also fall victim to these violations at a higher rate.

The Bigger Picture

When looking at the grand scale of things, the financial exploitation of workers is staggering. Bad employers are stealing around $15 billion annually from their employees, purely from minimum wage violations alone. This amount surpasses the total value of property crimes committed in the U.S. each year. Yet, there is a stark difference in the resources allocated to combat wage theft compared to property crime.

This substantial wage theft affects workers and puts undue pressure on taxpayers and state economies. Around one-third of workers experiencing these violations rely on publicly funded assistance programs like SNAP and housing subsidies. Moreover, wage theft artificially lowers labor costs for the “thieving” companies, creating an unfair competitive advantage and putting downward pressure on wages industry-wide.

The Solution

Enforcing tougher wage and hour laws and strengthening enforcement against wage theft should be a priority to deter higher rates of violations. Furthermore, raising wages for low-wage workers could lead to significant public savings and improvements in our collective health, education, and social mobility.

Nobody should be robbed of their hard-earned money, especially under the guise of employment. Let’s join hands to bring this hidden theft to light and take appropriate action.

One notable example of combating wage theft is the recent victory of Disneyland employees, who filed a class action lawsuit that resulted in a $233 million award for their lost wages. This case highlights how employees can unite to challenge unfair labor practices by collectively filing a class action lawsuit. Such lawsuits allow workers to pool their resources, share their grievances, and present a united front against powerful employers. To effectively pursue this legal avenue, employees should consider hiring an experienced employment law attorney who handles class action cases. These attorneys can guide employees through the legal process, ensuring their voices are heard and their rights are upheld while potentially securing significant restitution for lost wages.

Posted on

Disneyland Workers Recover $233 Million in Wage Theft Class Action Lawsuit

Unions - collective bargaining, class actions.

The Dire Plight of Disneyland Workers and the Importance of Labor Law Enforcement

In 2018, a disturbing report from Occidental College indicated a grim reality concerning Disneyland employees. Findings pointed out a 15% plummet in real hourly wages from 2000 to 2017. Consequently, three-quarters of the employees did not earn enough to cover basic necessities, and over half the workforce lived under continuous eviction concerns. Even more startling, one in ten employees had experienced homelessness within the previous two years.

Meanwhile, the Disney CEO enjoyed an enormous paycheck of $65.6 million in 2018, highlighting the stark wage disparity in the company. Fortunately, this injustice spurred the Anaheim voters into action by approving Measure L, or the Living Wage Ordinance, which pushes for a progressive increase in the minimum wage of hospitality employees benefiting from city subsidies.

However, despite the popular support for Measure L, Disney fiercely debated and resisted its efficient application at Disneyland. This defiance eventually led to a class action lawsuit against Disneyland, which put forth a robust argument that the company still benefited from city subsidies and, hence, should comply with Measure L.

After an initial setback, the Disneyland employees finally triumphed when a California appeal court overturned the initial ruling in 2023, deeming the bond agreement a “city subsidy.” This victory was cemented when the California Supreme Court declined to review the case, leading to a landmark settlement of $233 million for wage theft—the largest in California history.

Such cases of wage theft are far more common than one might think. American workers lose approximately $15 billion annually to minimum wage violations alone, with other forms of wage theft costing an estimated $50 billion annually. However, a dismally small fraction of these stolen wages are ever recovered, which comes down to a lack of resources and scant attention given to wage theft investigations.

Nationally, the Department of Labor recovered only about $3.24 billion in stolen wages from 2017 to 2020. This lack of recovery potential is due in part to the complex nature of class-action lawsuits and the minimal resources available to state and federal agencies responsible for investigating wage theft cases. To further complicate the issue, policies like the Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program, if reinstated, could enable companies to avoid penalties for wage theft if they self-reported and paid back the stolen wages.

A key driving force behind successful wage theft recovery is the support of experienced employment law attorneys with expertise in class action cases. The Disneyland case exemplifies how these professionals can help employees navigate complex legal avenues to claim their rightful wages. They understand the intricacies of employment law, have the resources to build a compelling case, and have the will to fight for justice.

In conclusion, the Disneyland class action case poignantly reminds us of the wage theft issue plaguing many American workers. There is an urgent need for more robust labor law enforcement, better funding for relevant state agencies, and the crucial role of experienced employment law attorneys in the battle against wage theft.

This article focuses on the amazing reporting of Judd Legum at Popular Information.

Posted on

Pregnancy Discrimination – Employee Fired After Developing Placenta Previa

Discrimination based on gender stereotypes women with children is illegal. Call gender discrimination lawyers Helmer Friedman LLP.

In a recent case, Castle Hills Master Association and its affiliated property management companies agreed to pay $55,000 and provide other relief to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a pregnant resident coordinator who was terminated from her position after developing placenta previa, a pregnancy-related disability requiring bed rest. The employee was subsequently denied her request for a leave of absence, leading to her unlawful termination.

The crux of the case pertains significantly to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which expressly prohibits discrimination based on an individual’s disability, including “pregnancy-related conditions.” The ADA’s protection covers cases where an employee is “treated unfavorably due to pregnancy or a pregnancy-related condition that the employee has.”

The ADA, under Title I, explicitly protects individuals from discrimination in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. It reads: “An employer cannot refuse to hire you because of a disability if you can perform the essential functions of the job with an accommodation.” This is directly applicable to the case at hand, where the dismissed employee could have continued her duties with the aid of a reasonable accommodation, in this case, a period of leave.

The ADA further states that employers must provide reasonable accommodation to an employee or job applicant with a disability “unless doing so would cause significant difficulty or expense for the employer.” This law clearly contradicts the actions of Castle Hills and its parent companies, who terminated the resident coordinator’s employment on the grounds of ineligibility for the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or short-term disability benefits.

As proven in this court case, pregnancy discrimination is unlawful and a violation of an individual’s rights under the ADA. Should you, a friend, or a family member experience pregnancy discrimination, it is essential to seek legal counsel. An employment lawyer with experience in this intricate area of law can guide you through the proceedings, ensuring your rights are protected, and justice is served.

Posted on

Sexual Harassment in US Biathlon: Stories & Steps Forward

Sexual abuse causes long term harm to victims.

Addressing Sexual Harassment and Retaliation in US Biathlon

The US Biathlon community—a sport characterized by grit, endurance, and precision—finds itself caught in the crosshairs of a disturbing reality. Reports of sexual harassment and retaliation have surfaced, exposing systemic issues that demand immediate attention. When athletes take the brave step to report abuse, they do so expecting justice and protection, not retaliation or silence. This blog explores the gravity of sexual harassment in the US Biathlon community, the implications for its athletes, and the steps required to create a safer environment for all.

Understanding Sexual Harassment in Biathlon

Sexual harassment takes many forms—verbal, physical, psychological—and its presence in sports can devastate individuals and the community. Female athletes, in particular, are disproportionately affected by this insidious issue, creating an unsafe space within disciplines meant to pride themselves on discipline, resilience, and teamwork.

Imagine dedicating your life to a pursuit you love, only to have it tainted by harassment that chips away at your confidence, integrity, and sense of belonging. For many athletes, the psychological toll includes anxiety, depression, and a loss of trust—not just in institutions but often in themselves. Beyond the individuals, the broader impact erodes the community fabric, replacing trust with fear and undermining the very principles sports aim to uphold.

Combatting this issue starts with understanding its scope and long-lasting effects. Above all, athletes deserve environments that prioritize their safety—physically, emotionally, and mentally.

The Current Landscape of US Biathlon

The grim reality of sexual harassment became starkly visible in US Biathlon after several brave athletes came forward.

Two-time Olympian Joan Wilder shared her harrowing story of attempted sexual assault in 1990. Despite raising complaints with Max Cobb, then the domestic team manager for the U.S. Biathlon Association, Wilder’s concerns fell on deaf ears. “My safety on the team was clearly secondary to a top-down power structure focused on image, medals, and marketing,” Wilder declared. Cobb would go on to serve as CEO of U.S. Biathlon and later become secretary general of the International Biathlon Union—an advancement that speaks volumes about the unchecked power structures athletes like Wilder faced.

Grace Boutot, a silver medalist at the 2009 Youth World Championships, similarly endured unaddressed abuse at the hands of two coaches. Her ordeal began when she was just 15 years old. Pleas for intervention went unheeded by Cobb and other officials, ultimately driving her to a suicide attempt. “I felt invisible,” Boutot admitted—a sobering statement that underscores the severe emotional consequences of such neglect.

Joanne Reid, a U.S. Biathlon national champion and two-time Olympian, endured years of harassment and sexual abuse from a ski-wax technician while competing in the elite World Cup circuit. When Reid courageously reported the abuse, the response was staggering. Rather than receiving support, she was told that the inappropriate behavior was “just part of the male European culture.” Deedra Irwin, Reid’s teammate and a member of the Army National Guard, stepped in repeatedly to shield her from further harm. Outraged, Irwin reported the situation to her military superiors, forcing the organization to acknowledge the problem.

However, real consequences only came when SafeSport launched an investigation. But even then, Reid was punished for speaking up. Six months after SafeSport began its inquiry, U.S. Biathlon arbitrarily changed the qualifications for its World Cup team—a revision that resulted in Reid’s removal. The criteria affected no one else on the roster, laying bare the retaliation she faced for her bravery.

Worse yet, retaliation is not unique to Reid’s case. According to surveys, 57% of women feared negative consequences to their careers for reporting misconduct. This culture of silence, one perpetuated by survival instincts in hostile environments, actively discourages victims and witnesses from coming forward, perpetuating cycles of abuse.

Steps Towards a Safer Community

To repair the fractured trust within US Biathlon, comprehensive actions must be taken:

1. Develop Clear Policies and Standards

Create explicit, actionable anti-harassment and retaliation policies. These policies must leave no room for ambiguity and outline specific consequences for offenders.

2. Implement Mandatory Training

Every athlete, coach, and staff member should undergo mandatory education on sexual harassment and retaliation. Training must cover identification, prevention, reporting mechanisms, and victim support to reduce ignorance and create accountability.

3. Set Up Independent Oversight

Allocate investigations to independent bodies to ensure impartiality and transparency. Organizations like SafeSport should be readily accessible and fully empowered to enforce disciplinary actions.

4. Create Anonymous Reporting Channels

Establish and widely publicize anonymous reporting systems to grant victims the courage to step forward without fear of retaliation or judgment.

5. Prioritize Victim Support

Mental health resources, legal protections, and peer support systems must be made available to those who experience harassment. Victims need to know they’re not alone—and they’re not powerless.

Empowering Athletes and Changing the Culture

Addressing systemic harassment is about more than just stopping harm—it’s about transforming a culture. Athletes need to feel secure, supported, and heard, and this change must be championed at all levels of leadership.

One approach is creating leadership initiatives that foster transparency and inclusivity. Role models within the sport should actively communicate a zero-tolerance stance and engage with athletes to ensure trust. Additionally, programs aimed at mentorship and allyship can encourage athletes to build collective resilience against abuses of power.

Furthermore, athletes themselves play an essential role in sustaining cultural shifts. By fostering solidarity and raising awareness among teammates, they can counter the isolation so often faced by victims.

Change Starts Here

The stories of Joan Wilder, Grace Boutot, and Joanne Reid highlight an uncomfortable truth about what exists beneath the surface of a respected sport like biathlon. Their courage in coming forward has paved the way for meaningful conversations about addressing sexual harassment and retaliation, but the responsibility for progress does not rest solely on their shoulders.

To the US Biathlon community, the message is clear: It’s time to take decisive action. Policies need to change. Reporting structures need rebuilding. Above all, trust needs to be repaired. Each of us, whether athlete, coach, or fan, has the power to contribute to a community rooted in respect and safety.

Together, we can ensure that biathlon remains not only a test of physical endurance but a bastion of fairness, dignity, and pride.

This post relied on the excellent reporting of MARTHA BELLISLE of the Associated Press.

Posted on

What Happens to Harassment Claims After a Business Is Acquired?

Celebrating a victory for justice.

What Happens to Discrimination and Harassment Claims When a Business Is Bought by a Larger Company?

Workplace harassment and discrimination are pervasive issues that affect millions of employees worldwide each year. From inappropriate comments and unfair treatment to deeply entrenched systems of bias, these experiences can leave employees feeling powerless and isolated. When a small business—your workplace—gets acquired by a larger company, questions often arise about what happens to ongoing or unresolved discrimination and harassment claims.

Do these claims disappear? Will the new company hold the previous owners accountable? Can victims expect their concerns to be addressed under a new management team? This blog explores the impact of corporate acquisitions on employee rights, providing clarity and actionable advice for navigating this complex scenario.

Workplace Acquisitions and Their Impact on Employees

Corporate acquisitions, where a larger company buys and takes over a smaller business, are commonplace in today’s business landscape. They often bring drastic changes for employees—from transitions in company culture to restructuring of roles and policies. While these mergers are marketed as growth opportunities for the business, employees may find themselves grappling with uncertainty and upheaval.

For employees who have filed discrimination or harassment claims prior to the acquisition, this uncertainty can turn into fear. Questions abound—is the new management obligated to honor pending claims? Will there be retaliation? Or will such complaints be swept under the rug, citing “corporate restructuring”?

An acquisition often leads to significant changes in Human Resources (HR) systems, policies, and responsible personnel. At times, it feels like the slate has been wiped clean for the incoming organization. However, this doesn’t mean previous claims are invalid—it’s a matter of understanding your legal protections and the process of maintaining accountability.

Legal Rights and Protections for Employees

Employees are protected by federal and state employment laws against harassment and discrimination under regulations such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). These laws make it illegal for employers to discriminate against employees based on race, gender, age, disability, religion, and other protected categories.

When a business is acquired, these protections do not disappear:

  1. Successor Liability:

Many jurisdictions enforce “successor liability,” meaning the larger company acquiring the smaller business inherits the legal responsibility for claims filed at the original organization. Employees should understand that their rights don’t evaporate just because ownership has changed hands.

  1. Pending Claims:

If a claim has already been filed with an external agency—such as the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission)—the new owner is legally compelled to address it.

  1. New Policies:

While the new owners may implement new anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies, this doesn’t absolve them of addressing past grievances under the prior management.

One critical point for employees to note is that the details of an acquisition agreement might stipulate whether discrimination claims are handled by the acquiring company or remain the responsibility of the previous owners. Understanding these provisions in the agreement is vital.

What Employees Can Do to Protect Their Rights

Filing or continuing a harassment or discrimination claim during a corporate acquisition can be intimidating. However, there are steps employees can take to ensure their rights are protected and their voices are heard amidst the upheaval:

  1. Document Everything:

Maintain records of incidents, including dates, times, witnesses, and specifics of any harassment or discrimination you’ve experienced. Documentation becomes even more crucial during an acquisition to preserve the context and details of your claim.

  1. Retain Claim Records:

If you’ve already filed a claim, make sure you have copies of all documentation, including communication with HR, legal filings, and correspondence with external agencies like the EEOC.

  1. Seek Legal Advice:

Consulting an employment attorney can help clarify how claims are addressed during acquisitions in your state. A lawyer can provide insights specific to your case and advocate for your rights if retaliation or dismissal occurs.

  1. Monitor New Policies:

Pay close attention to new codes of conduct and employee policies introduced by the acquiring company. If unclear, ask for explicit clarification on how prior complaints will be handled under these new guidelines.

  1. Continue Reporting:

If the inappropriate behavior persists, don’t hesitate to voice concerns to the new HR team. Just because the ownership or reporting structure changes doesn’t mean the behavior should be tolerated.

Remember, laws are designed to offer robust protection, but you may need to be proactive about ensuring they are enforced.

Real-Life Case Studies

Case Study 1: Accountability in the Workplace

In 2017, a teenage employee at Elite Wireless endured repeated sexual harassment from a sales manager, including unwelcome advances and requests for sex. The situation worsened when the sales manager sexually assaulted her during a holiday party. Despite the employee filing reports and a criminal complaint, Elite Wireless failed to take action, allowing the manager to continue working alongside her. In 2019, Wireless World acquired Elite Wireless and, according to the EEOC’s charges, became liable for the company’s failure to address these serious allegations. This case highlights the critical need for swift and decisive responses to workplace harassment to protect employees and promote accountability.

Case Study 2: Discrimination and Corporate Bias

Mr. Sizar joined Hatch Mott MacDonald (a predecessor to The Mott MacDonald) in 2013 and advanced through the corporate ranks, consistently earning praise for his strong performance through glowing reviews and evaluations. Despite his success, he observed a troubling pattern of bias within the organization, where younger white males were favored over more qualified non-white, female, and older employees.

For example, his supervisor, Daniel Tempelis, terminated two senior staff members in their early sixties—one of Chinese descent and the other of Asian Indian heritage—and replaced them with younger, less experienced white males. Mr. Sizar also reported that numerous other non-white and older employees were similarly dismissed and replaced by less qualified, younger white males.

This case underscores the pervasive issue of systemic discrimination in the workplace. It serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of fostering equity, addressing bias, and holding organizations accountable for the fair treatment of all employees.

What This Means for You

Discrimination and harassment should never be overlooked, whether under your current employer or a new corporate owner. If your workplace is undergoing changes due to an acquisition, remember that federal and state laws exist to protect you. Don’t hesitate to consult professionals, document your experiences thoroughly, and speak up if necessary.

Acquisitions might bring a storm of change, but your rights form the anchor. Stay informed, proactive, and engaged in ensuring your voice is heard.

Are you currently dealing with workplace harassment or discrimination during a corporate acquisition? Seek legal advice to protect your rights and review your options. The right support could make all the difference.

Posted on

Kurt Bluemel Accused of Pregnancy Discrimination: A Closer Look at the PWFA

Pregnancy discrimination lawyers - protecting pregnant employees from discrimination.

Kurt Bluemel Accused of Pregnancy Discrimination: A Closer Look at the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

A recently filed lawsuit against Kurt Bluemel, a Baltimore County-based commercial nursery, underscores the critical importance of enforcing pregnancy discrimination laws. The complaint alleges that the company failed to accommodate a pregnant employee seeking to return to work after maternity leave. Upon her attempt to resume her position, she was informed that no work was available despite the company hiring new, non-pregnant employees both before and after her return attempt. Such actions, if proven, directly violate the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This case raises serious concerns about the commitment of businesses to upholding workers’ rights, particularly those of pregnant employees.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: A Timely Intervention

Enacted to protect the rights of soon-to-be-mothers in the workplace, the PWFA requires employers, agencies, unions, and employees to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified employees experiencing limitations related to pregnancy or childbirth. This is unless such accommodations would lead to undue hardship to the business.

The enforcement of the PWFA mirrors the provisions of Title VII and related acts, permitting damages but with limitations if the employer can prove a good faith effort to provide reasonable accommodations. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has been charged with the task of creating regulations and has made improvements to charge processing.

Decoding the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

The PWFA is comprehensive in its approach to safeguarding pregnant employees. It defines “known limitation” as any physical or mental condition related to pregnancy or childbirth communicated to the employer. Even conditions that may seem minor, episodic, or related to general health, if related to pregnancy or childbirth, must be acknowledged by the employer.

The Act provides a framework to support reasonable accommodations for pregnant employees, from temporary suspension of certain functions, job restructuring, to assignment in a light or modified duty program. Employers are required to find the best fit that does not result in undue hardship.

The Importance of Career Continuity for Women

The devastating reality is that women often face significant hurdles in maintaining their careers while pregnant or raising families. This not only stunts career growth but also disrupts financial stability and well-being. It is absolutely critical that businesses take steps to accommodate pregnant employees’ needs, ensuring they can effectively balance their professional responsibilities and personal health.

A Final Word – Know Your Rights

If you have personally experienced pregnancy-related discrimination or retaliation, it’s paramount that you seek assistance. Contact an experienced employment law attorney who can help assess your situation and guide you through the legal recourse available. The law is there to protect you – you don’t have to face discrimination in silence.

Posted on

The Battle Toward Equal Pay: Unveiling the Maryland Department of Health’s Sex Discrimination Case

Constitutional rights lawyers of Helmer Friedman LLP.

The echoes of “equal pay for equal work” resonate more than ever with the recent settlement of a sex discrimination lawsuit involving the Thomas B. Finan Center of the Maryland Department of Health. This mental health center, based in Cumberland, Maryland, will pay a sizable sum of $270,000 to address pay injustices that have persisted for years.

The lawsuit alleged that a less experienced male recreation therapist received a higher wage compared to his four female colleagues who had greater job experience. Unfortunately, their requests for pay equalization fell on deaf ears. The unjust situation squarely contravenes the Equal Pay Act of 1963, a historic legislation that outlawed gender-based pay discrimination.

Passed more than five decades ago, the Equal Pay Act of 1963 set the foundation for a more equitable work environment. Powerhouse politicians like Esther Peterson, the then-assistant secretary of Labor and director of the Women’s Bureau, and President John F. Kennedy, were instrumental in its enactment. Their relentless advocacy and sheer determination ensured the landmark law was etched into the statutory books.

This act revolutionized the workplace dynamic, offering women new opportunities and greater earning potential than ever before. However, the Finan Center case is a grim reminder that the battle for gender parity continues.

If you are a woman who suspects you may be a victim of wage discrimination, it is crucial to recognize your rights. The workplace should be fair and free from any form of discrimination, including gender-based pay discrimination. If you observe discrepancies in your pay compared to your male counterparts who perform equal work, don’t hesitate to raise it with your HR personnel. HR professionals themselves should take the lead in speaking out against such discriminatory practices.

Finally, remember, you are not alone in this fight. Seek the counsel of an experienced employment law attorney to protect your rights and ensure you receive equal pay for equal work. While the journey toward achieving gender pay equality may be tough, each step forward propels us all towards a more equitable future. Every woman deserves equal pay for equal work. The fight for equity and justice continues, and together, we can make a difference.

Posted on

Unveiling the Dark Side of Medical Devices: Investigating Corporate Ethics and Patient Safety

Medtronic, medical devices, sign.

In recent years, medical device giant Medtronic has come under fire due to allegations involving their business practices and patient safety concerns. Central to this controversy are their medical devices, particularly the GIA 80 surgical stapler, which has led to numerous patient injuries and even deaths due to malfunctions and alleged cover-ups.

Leanne Houston, a former Medtronic sales representative, highlighted Medtronic’s questionable business practices. Taking on the role of a whistleblower, Houston revealed unsettling, unethical conduct by the corporation. She exposed that Medtronic was using kickbacks to secure exclusivity over hospitals and surgeons. This strategy pushed forward the use of their medical devices despite being more expensive and often marketed for off-label uses. Such manipulative actions flagrantly violate the law and indubitably prioritize corporate profits over patient safety.

The allegations made by Houston against Medtronic are grave indeed. The company’s indifference towards patient safety led to the covering up various issues with the surgical staplers and payments to hospitals and physicians solely for the sake of using their products. Houston’s lawsuit accuses Medtronic of engaging in unlawful conduct by leveraging kickbacks to induce hospitals and surgeons to purchase their devices.

This is not the first time Medtronic has been in the hot seat for ethical violations. The company’s history is marred with accusations of fraud, kickbacks, and anti-competitive conduct. In fact, Medtronic’s past settlements total over $60 million on allegations regarding fraud and kickbacks alone. Yet, despite their ongoing controversy, the penalties Medtronic has faced thus far appear to be merely the price of doing business.

This incessant prioritization of profits over patients must invariably cease. It is of utmost urgency that real, substantial barriers and penalties be put in place to deter corporate misdeeds and protect patients’ lives. We must stand against harmful corporate greed exemplified by the likes of Medtronic, ensuring the corporations prioritize their ethical and social responsibilities.

If you or a loved one have been harmed due to a medical device, do not hesitate to seek help and justice. Approach a trustworthy and dedicated lawyer who can help guide you through the legal complexities and ensure you receive the compensation you deserve. Furthermore, if you possess any information about corporate misdeeds, please come forward. Your courage can ensure justice is served and can protect countless others from facing similar harm. Whistleblowers play a vital role in highlighting corporate misconduct and even stand to potentially receive rewards. It’s high time we call out corporate greed and prioritize patient safety.

Source: https://www.icij.org/investigations/implant-files/whistleblower-accuses-medical-tech-giant-medtronic-of-putting-profit-before-patients/

Posted on

Jury Awards $2.17 Million in Sex Harassment Lawsuit Against SkyWest Airlines

Women's rights to privacy, reproductive health care, abortion care lost - wrongful death lawyers Helmer Friedman LLP.

A troubling story is unfolding in the aviation industry. Sarah Budd, a former SkyWest Airlines employee, bravely shared her experience of sexual harassment by colleagues at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport. She courageously spoke up about the crude and demeaning behavior she faced in a mostly male department. Sadly, her calls for help from her bosses were ignored.

On her first day, a co-worker asked if she “liked whips and chains and leathers,” suggesting she’d fit in well if she did. Over the months, she endured countless off-color jokes and comments. “They didn’t seem to care if I was uncomfortable,” she told the jury. “In fact, it only spurred them on more. … It’s like they enjoyed my discomfort.”

Her male colleagues hid behind crude jokes and inappropriate comments, creating a toxic environment that left her feeling unsafe and isolated. Despite her attempts to report the harassment, her supervisor took no immediate action, highlighting an uncaring culture.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 clearly prohibits such harassment, and SkyWest Airlines failed to manage Budd’s case properly, violating this law. It’s a grim reminder of the struggles women face at work, where their concerns often go unheard.

“Ms. Budd had over a decade of experience at SkyWest and before the sexual harassment occurred and had intended to retire there,” said Alexa Lang, a trial attorney in the EEOC’s Dallas District Office. “All Ms. Budd wanted was to be heard and to stop this from happening to other women. The jury heard her. We hope the verdict sends a message to SkyWest and other employers that they must take responsibility for making sure their workplaces are free from sexually hostile conduct. Everyone deserves to feel safe at work.”

Taking her case to court, the jury awarded Sarah $2.17 million for the trauma she endured. However, an outdated provision in the Civil Rights Act of 1991 reduced this to just $300,000, the maximum for companies with over 500 employees. This unfair cap undermines the real harm victims suffer.

Efforts are underway to fix these disparities with the Equal Remedies Act of 2024. If passed, this law will eliminate damage caps in employment discrimination cases, offering more fair remedies for victims.

Despite the emotional turmoil, Sarah’s resilience led to a unanimous verdict from the Dallas jury, finding SkyWest Airlines guilty of harassment and inaction.

For those facing similar situations, remember you’re not alone. An experienced employment lawyer, especially one familiar with sexual harassment cases, can be a huge help. A committed lawyer can even take your case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Standing up against discrimination and injustice isn’t easy, but with the right legal support, victims can reclaim their dignity and peace.

Posted on

Championing Disability Rights: The Role of ADA and Legal Support

The ADA ensures equal opportunities regardless and ADA lawyers protect clients rights, Helmer Friedman LLP.

In a ground-breaking move that draws attention to the important protections granted by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Catalyst Family Inc., a non-profit entity operating child development centers across California, has agreed to a settlement amounting to almost $150,000. The settlement resolves a disability discrimination lawsuit alleging that the company violated the ADA by firing an assistant teacher instead of granting his request for an accommodation due to his intellectual and cognitive disabilities.

Founded in 1975 as Continuing Development Incorporated and subsequently rebranded to Catalyst Family, Inc. in 2020, the organization has been serving families and children in California for over 45 years. Yet, it found itself at the receiving end of a lawsuit when it dismissed a part-time employee who had been with the company for two years after he sought an accommodation for his disability in March 2021. Remarkably, this termination occurred instead of fully implementing the requested accommodation, leading to allegations of the ADA’s contravention.

A cornerstone of the ADA, a fundamental legislation in the United States, is the requirement for employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities unless it leads to an undue hardship on the company. This mandate was enacted to level the playing field and give equal opportunities to all, regardless of their disability.

After investigating the issue, a pre-litigation conciliation process ensued, leading to the aforementioned settlement. Catalyst Family Inc. agreed not only to pay the monetary damages but also to revise its non-discrimination policies and procedures and provide training for all managers, recruiters, and HR personnel.

The company also committed to offering the terminated worker a neutral reference letter and removing the termination notice from his personnel file. The employee, now employed at a different educational program, expressed satisfaction with the settlement, indicating it was beneficial for everyone with disabilities, their families, and the children under their care.

Nancy Sienko, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission San Francisco District Director, noted that Catalyst Family’s cooperation to ensure compliance with the ADA’s requirements marks a victory for all involved. She highlighted the agency’s Strategic Enforcement Plan, emphasizing the importance of protecting vulnerable workers, including people with developmental or intellectual disabilities, from employment discrimination.

Through this case, it is clear that the ADA’s provisions for reasonable accommodations are not just optional niceties but essential rights for people with disabilities. It reminds businesses about the high cost of disability discrimination in the workplace, which goes beyond monetary penalties to include significant reputational damage.

As this case illustrates, employees who believe they have been discriminated against due to their disability should not hesitate to stand up for their rights. Seeking an experienced ADA attorney can make all the difference in challenging discriminatory practices, ensuring that policies align with the ADA, and attaining the justice they deserve. Reaching out to a legal expert can be the first step towards a more inclusive and fair workplace where everyone’s right to pursue their dreams is respected.