Employ them. (George Lenard, Sept. 2).
Posts Tagged ‘workplace’
UK: Army tanks could run afoul of noise edict
“Defence chiefs are fighting to prevent the Army’s tanks being stopped in their tracks by the introduction of a European directive on vibration and noise at work. The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations and the Control of Noise at Work Regulations have left officers scrambling to discover if the military’s armoured vehicles break the rules.” The Ministry of Defence intends to invoke an “opt-out” provision to escape compliance; “If you are in a combat situation then clearly it will be difficult to bring in these regulations,” explained a spokesman for the health and safety executive, another government agency which is implementing the directive. (Thomas Harding, “‘Noise at work’ rules threaten to knock out Army’s tanks”, Daily Telegraph, Sept. 2). In the past, British defense officials have expressed alarm that the noise of gunfire during infantry training and even military brass bands could violate EU noise-at-work rules: see Dec. 22-25, 2000.
“Why granny is in an old age home”
It would make sense to hire a home attendant for her — but then California labor law would kick in. Among the perverse features of that law: to qualify as a personal attendant whose employment is not subject to prohibitive wage-hour laws, a round-the-clock attendant must not be asked to carry out such duties as getting the client to take her medicines (that’s reserved for nurses, you see). (Bookworm Room, Aug. 17).
Eenie Meenie Minie Update
Grace Fuller claims that she suffered two epileptic seizures because a flight attendant used the phrase “Eenie, meenie, minie, mo, pick a seat, we gotta go” to passengers boarding an open-seating flight late; Fuller and her travelling companion, both African-Americans, ascribed racist meaning to the phrase, and sued under a variety of federal and state claims. Some claims were thrown out, and a jury did what a judge should’ve done sooner, and bounced the rest. (Feb. 9, 2004; Jan. 22, 2004 and links therein).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court judgment for defendants. After a full trial, and briefing for an appeal, the cost to Southwest Airlines of “Eenie Meenie Minie Moe” was surely in the six digits. But, though the law in questions permit plaintiffs to recover attorneys’ fees if they are successful (surely the only reason an attorney agreed to bring this suit), defendant Southwest Airlines is going to have to swallow the cost of this ridiculous suit. The opinion creates no precedent, so if Sawyer wants to sue someone else for using a nursery rhyme, she can do so in the future. (Sawyer v. Southwest Airlines Co., No. 04-3109 (10th Cir. Aug. 10, 2005) (hat tip to P.N.)).
N.J. court chills job references
Management-side lawyers are predicting a further drying up of reference-giving in response to a New Jersey appellate court’s ruling “appl[ying] the tort of negligent misrepresentation to a situation where an employer allegedly gave false information in an employment reference.” Marsha Singer said she was fired after a manager called her previous employer and was given an incorrect job title for the post she had held there; a court dismissed her claims for defamation and wrongful interference but allowed the negligent misrepresentation claim to go forward. Richard J. Reibstein of the New York office of Philadelphia’s Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen called the ruling a “dramatic shift in the law of post-employment references everywhere” and said it would influence employers outside the Garden State. (Dee McAree, “Ruling Could Lead to Restrictions on References”, National Law Journal, Aug. 5). For more on the chill on reference-giving, see Aug. 7, 2003; as it happens, New Jersey is a state that figured prominently in the widely noted case of alleged killer nurse Charles Cullen (Dec. 18, 2003; Jan. 29, Mar. 3 and Mar. 30, 2004), in which litigation-shy hospitals did not give each other frank warnings of their doubts about Cullen.
Whistleblower fees
They’re such a great deal for the public, you know:
An Oakland, Calif., attorney who blasted the University of California Regents for wasting taxpayer money during a seven-year lawsuit is asking for $5.4 million in fees and costs — 2 1/2 times what his client got.
Patricia Gillette of Heller Ehrman, representing the UC Regents, described attorney Gary Gwilliam’s request as “outrageous”: “Gary likes to talk about how much taxpayers’ dollars are being wasted by the lab, and then he has the audacity to ask for $5.4 million in his plaintiff’s case”. (Warren Lutz, The Recorder, Jul. 21).
NY schools drug counselor caught with cocaine can be fired
And it only took three years of litigation to reach that result. Michael Campbell and the New York State United Teachers Union sued to get Campbell his job back at Intermediate School 72 after he was caught in his car with ten aluminum bags of cocaine, and a hearing officer and a trial court agreed before the appellate court reversed. There might be still another appeal. Taxpayers can thank Campbell’s lawyer, James R. Sandner, and lower court judge Debra A. James. (Samuel Maull, “Appeals court says teacher arrested as drug suspect should lose job”, AP/Newsday, Jul. 7 (via EdWatch); opinion).
Jackpot justice in LA: Dr. Robert Johnson
When he was 81, Dr. Robert Johnson’s supervisors at the Lancaster state prison complained to the state medical board that he suffered from memory loss that impaired his work as a surgeon and suggested he retire. Johnson’s lawyer, Ralph B. Wegis, says the investigation cleared him, but also ended his career, and Johnson sued. A Los Angeles County Superior Court jury awarded $1.6 million in lost wages (apparently based on testimony that Johnson was going to continue to be a practicing surgeon until he was 96) and damages for emotional distress adding up to $20 million. (Jean Guccione, “Prison Doctor Awarded $20 Million in Age Case”, LA Times, Jul. 20). Imagine the lawsuit that would’ve bankrupted the prison if Johnson had committed malpractice and the prison hadn’t investigated suspected problems. Cf. also Aug. 30.
One sexual harassment charge leads to another
The Einsteins in Washington, D.C.’s police department decided to investigate a sexual harassment claim by making anatomical comparisons of the accused with the description given by the accuser. Lawrence Bailey was exonerated, but not before he was required to submit to a series of embarrassing tests involving a tape measure. He plans to file a civil lawsuit; the accuser, meanwhile, says the department botched the investigation and stands by her story, so we may see a second lawsuit. (Dave Jamieson, “How’s It Hanging?”, Washington City Paper, Jul. 1).
Wal-Mart job pays millions
Who says you’ll never get rich working at Wal-Mart? A federal magistrate judge has just approved a $2.8 million award for disability-based discrimination on behalf of plaintiff Patrick Brady, who suffers from cerebral palsy. The company’s offense? It “violated federal and state laws by making a prohibited inquiry [relating to his disabilities] before giving Brady an employment offer. The company also subjected Brady to adverse employment conditions by transferring him from the pharmacy to a more physically taxing position pushing carts in the parking lot, according to the verdict.” The magistrate judge complained bitterly about having to reduce the award from the $7.5 million in damages, including $5 million in punitive damages, originally voted by the jury. On the tendency of stringent liability exposure to discourage employers’ hiring of disabled persons (workplace participation of whom actually went down, not up, after the ADA was passed), see, among other sources, Jul. 11, 2000, and this NBER paper. (Michael Bobelian, “Court Reluctantly Trims Wal-Mart Penalty”, New York Law Journal, Jun. 23).