For employees with certain disabilities, returning to work can be challenging. As a result, the law requires employers in Washington, D.C. to provide reasonable accommodation to workers who are not able to function normally in their previous jobs. If employees ask for accommodation, employers must do whatever they can to make sure they are still able to work.
It is a scenario some workers fear: to say something that an employer dislikes and to be fired because of it. As Forbes explains, the First Amendment protection of free speech rights does not typically apply to workplaces. In many cases, an employer may sanction or fire someone for what they say. However, there are important exceptions that can land an employer in hot water for terminating a Washington D.C. worker for his or her speech.
Here's an update on the October 2018 jury verdict in our firm's tenure case against American University. On February 5, 2019, Judge Rankin denied defendant's post-trial motion . AU made three primary arguments, each of which the court rejected. Some excerpts follow (emphasis added) -
Alan Kabat recently organized and moderated a CLE panel at the annual conference of the Metropolitan Washington Employment Lawyers Association on wage and hour laws, which included a discussion on misclassification of employees as independent contractors in the new "gig" economy. Increasingly, employers are attempting to treat their workers as independent contractors instead of as employees, thereby removing the protection of nearly all the employment discrimination laws from their workers. Further, the tax code was recently amended to favor employers' characterization of workers as independent contractors. His report discussed the often unforeseen consequences of misclassification of workers. Alan also described the ongoing litigation involving Uber drivers and recent legislative attempts to address the misclassification of workers, to ensure that the spectrum of employment laws will protect all workers, not just those in a traditional employer/employee relationship.
There are at least four ways in which sex-based favoritism in the workplace - where the boss favors an employee with whom he is having a sexual relationship - creates legal liability for the employer. First is through a discrimination claim by the other workers who were passed over for a promotion or other benefits that the paramour received. Second is through a "quid pro quo" hostile work environment claim if the other workers refused to accede to the supervisor's demand for a relationship. Third is through a retaliation claim if the other workers protested the supervisor's favoritism and were then retaliated against by management. The fourth is a long-recognized but little used claim for hostile work environment based on sexual favoritism in the workplace.
People may be subjected to a number of examples of unfair treatment on the basis of their faith. Unfortunately, this is a reality that many people have had to accept. However, this mistreatment is unacceptable in a workplace environment when it violates the rights of an employee or even a job applicant. People are discriminated against because of their religious beliefs in all sorts of ways and it is pivotal for victims of this mistreatment to look into their legal options and hold responsible those who violated their rights.
Workplace discrimination can happen in a number of ways. Many people hear about racial discrimination or an employee being subjected to discrimination based on their gender or religion. It is also crucial to point out that discrimination can affect all types of people once they reach a certain age. Sadly, age discrimination is rampant in workplaces across the country and it has virtually destroyed the lives of many people who are fully qualified to perform various roles. If you have experienced age discrimination or some other type of unlawful discrimination while working (or applying for a job), do not stand by and ignore the violation.
One of the very important employment laws in the U.S. is the Family and Medical Leave Act. This federal law, and its equivalents in many states and Washington, D.C., gives qualifying workers the right to certain amounts of unpaid leave from their job to attend to certain medical or family needs.