When you start a new job, you’re handed a stack of paperwork. Offer letters, handbooks, direct deposit forms, and somewhere in the mix, often without much explanation, an arbitration agreement. Most people sign it without a second thought. But understanding what that agreement actually means can be genuinely important if something goes wrong down the road.
Continue reading
If you’ve been dealing with harassment at work because of a disability, you may be wondering whether what’s happening to you actually “counts” legally. The answer depends on where you work and which law applies — but New York workers have some of the strongest protections in the country.
Continue reading
Sometimes it’s a pattern of being passed over, treated differently, or pushed out. Other times it’s more direct. Either way, if something about how you’re being treated at work feels wrong, it’s worth understanding what the law actually protects — because the answer might surprise you.
Continue reading
By Naeisha Rose/Queens Chronicle
The grassroots effort to formalize the reclamation of public space for an Open Streets program on a stretch of 26 blocks in Jackson Heights is taking shape.
Last Wednesday, 46 members of the City Council approved the renaming of the corridor along 34th Avenue from 69th Street to Junction Boulevard to Paseo Park, a nod to the predominantly Hispanic neighborhood, as paseo means stroll or promenade in Spanish.
Five councilmembers were absent, on medical leave or abstained from voting.
Leading the charge for the co-naming, which is expected to take place spring 2024 if Mayor Adams signs the bill, is Councilman Shekar Krishnan (D-Jackson Heights), the prime sponsor of Intro. 1278.
“… Paseo Park is the incredible story of a community coming together during a crisis to create new open space, filling it with families, music, and joy,” Krishnan, chair of the Committee on Parks and Recreation, said in a statement. “Our entire community is grateful for the tireless work of the 34th Avenue Open Streets Coalition and Alliance for Paseo Park …”
The Alliance for Paseo Park and 34th Avenue Open Streets Coalition are two groups that were formed in spring 2020, the height of the spread of the Covid-19 virus. Both organizations wanted to address the lack of green space in Jackson Heights as the neighborhood ranks last in the city for per capita park space, while also being in the eighth-most densely populated ZIP Code, 11372, in the United States.
Paseo Park would create up to 7.5 acres of green space, quadrupling the park space available in Jackson Heights. Since the city’s pandemic Open Streets program there three year ago, crashes in the area decreased 42 percent, the space was improved with new surfacing and planters and approximately 7,000 children from seven public schools, a private school and three universal pre-K institutions are able to travel through the park, according to Krishnan’s office.
While Paseo Park is being touted as the “gold standard” for the city’s Open Streets program, some detractors of it, as well as of similar projects throughout the city, do not consider it a jewel in their eyes.
A complaint filed in the Eastern District of New York by 11 people — a 12th person dropped out of the lawsuit — claims that the Open Streets initiative, which takes away roadway for public parks and pedestrian plazas, is in violation of the American with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, along with city and state Human Rights laws.
Matthew Berman, the attorney representing the plaintiffs, said his clients are not challenging the entire citywide program, but specific Open Streets projects.
“… although changes to these particular streets may result in broader changes,” Berman said.
Berman added that the ADA and the Rehabilitation acts require equal access to streets and sidewalks for the disabled, especially for programs using federal funds.
“The upshot is that the city is required to provide reasonable accommodations to the disabled so that they have equal access and the city has failed to do that,” he said.
Open Streets programs are expensive and resource–intensive, and despite grants from the city, they also rely on the availability of federal and state funding, according to neighborhoodcommons.nyc.
The Chronicle reached out to Krishnan’s office about the lawsuit, but he was not available for comment.
UPDATE: This story was updated to say that the attorney’s name is Matthew Berman.
Read the article from Queens Chronicle here.
Published April 27, 2023 7:38AM
BROOKLYN – Mill Jonakait, 77, is suing New York City.
“The Open Streets is very troublesome,” Jonakait said. “I think they haven’t thought through what it means to people like me.”
Jonakait lives in Fort Greene, Brooklyn and walks with a limp. She was born without a femur in her right leg, making it 10 inches shorter than her left leg.
Mill Jonakait was born without a femur in her right leg, making it 10 inches shorter than her left leg.
Jonakait and 11 other city residents with disabilities are suing the city, hoping to modify the Open Streets program.
About 300 city blocks across the five boroughs are closed off to traffic so pedestrians and cyclists can use the open space. The program started during the pandemic, but it limits the amount of available parking. Jonakait is able to drive, but parking is an obstacle.
“I usually walk with a walker around here because it’s difficult, and when I have to walk blocks, three, four, five blocks from my parked car to here. It’s a challenge to me,” Jonakait said.
About 300 city blocks across the five boroughs are closed off to traffic so pedestrians and cyclists can use the open space.
The federal lawsuit filed against the city says the Open Streets program violates the Americans With Disabilities Act.
“It’s a real challenge and tragedy for people who are more disabled than I who can’t get their Access-A-Ride,” Jonakait said. “They can’t catch an Uber where they want to.”
“They have a right to participate in their daily life with dignity and independence.”— Attorney Matthew Berman
Attorney Matthew Berman represents the 12 plaintiffs in the case.
“They have a right to participate in their daily life with dignity and independence and not be converted into shut-ins by the fact that this program has locked down huge swaths of the city,” Berman said.
The New York City Department of Transportation oversees the program.
Spokesperson Scott Gastel issued a statement, saying, “Open Streets enhances safety, accessibility, and equity for a large number of New Yorkers using the roads including seniors and people with disabilities. The City will review the case.”
Read the full article and see the video segment on Fox 5 News New York.
Texas civil rights and discrimination attorneys point out areas in the law where Texas civil rights and discrimination protection falls through the cracks. Discrimination may have different motivations such as race, gender, national origin, sexual orientation and disability. Texans are not all protected equally when it comes to civil rights violations and protection from discrimination. Examples include:
Public Accommodations
Most people agree that public accommodations should be free from policies that discriminate. Texas has no statewide law prohibiting such discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, sexual orientation, or physical handicap. Some local governments have passed ordinances prohibiting discrimination in public places. This has resulted in confusion as to what is legal from one municipality to the next. Texas civil rights and discrimination attorneys claim this highlights the need for statewide legislation.
Discrimination in the Workplace
According to state law in Texas, civil rights in the workplace exist in many areas including employees’ race, age, gender, religion, national origin or disability. However, Texas civil rights and discrimination state law does not extent to sexual orientation. Texas civil rights and discrimination attorneys maintain that policies that favor non-discrimination are good business.
Discrimination in Education
According to Texas civil rights and discrimination laws there are no specific prohibitions stopping a public educational institution from discriminating on account of race, ethnicity, color, gender, disability, sexual orientation, disability, religion or national origin of the student or the parent of the student. There are laws in place prohibiting student on student harassment covered under bullying codes. However, there are no similar laws covering discrimination and harassment originating from employees of the educational institution.
Discrimination from Insurance Companies
Insurance companies are prohibited from discrimination because of race, ethnicity, color, gender, disability, marital status, disability, religion, geographic location or national origin. However, Texas civil rights and discrimination laws make no provision for the prohibition based on sexual orientation and sexual identity. This discrimination can take form of higher rates, refusal to insure, limited coverage, extent of coverage and nature of coverage.
Since in Texas, civil rights and discrimination protection does no extent to sexual orientation and transgender people when it comes to insurance coverage, many insurance companies deny coverage for procedures related to transgender and sexual orientation issues. Many are refused coverage for procedures because of their transgender and sexual orientation status and are required to put off the procedure or pay for it out of pocket when it should have covered by the insurance premium to begin with.
The rules issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) expand the protection granted employees under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). These rules were authorized by the ADA Amendments (ADAA) and were passed by Congress in 2008. The results are a significant expansion of the number of individuals claiming ADA protection.
Americans with disabilities are a large and economically disadvantaged group. The goals of ADA mandates are similar to civil rights. One goal is to make sure people with disabilities have access to employment. In the past, employers traditionally shut out disabled people from employment. A second goal is to increase job opportunities for disabled. As a group, people with disabilities earn less than people without disabilities. Employers that will be affected. Employers that employ 15 or more employees who work for at least twenty calendar weeks within a year. The EEOC points out that tracking this can become rather complicated and recommends staying in close communication to ensure compliance. Broad is the protection. The ADAA has expanded the definition of “disability”. As a result, employees will have a much easier time when seeking the law’s protection.
Do I fall under this broad coverage? According to the EEOC, an individual with a disability is a person who:
The key is how limited you are in performing your major life activities. For example, doctors may have diagnosed you as being clinically depressed. However, you may not be qualified for coverage because you are not substantially limited in performing major life activities.
What are my rights?If you are covered under the ADA, your employer must make “reasonable accommodations” as long it does not cause the employer “undue hardship”. Undue hardship for the employer means it would cause significant difficulty or expense. Reasonable accommodation can take many forms, but some common examples are included here:
Filing a Charge. If you think an employer has discriminated against you because of your disability, you may file at the nearest EEOC office or find an experienced employment attorney. If you have no office in your area, it can usually be over the phone.
