Bovitz v. Wells Fargo – A Discrimination Lawsuit

{Read in 2:30 minutes}  Bovitz v. Wells Fargo - A Discrimination Lawsuit by Monica HinckenImagine dedicating almost 35 years to the financial industry. You work hard. You are successful. You build an impressive book of business. And yet, you are continuously hindered from reaching your potential – not because you are not qualified, because you are; not because you do not have the necessary experience, because you do.  You are passed over because you are an older woman. Our client, Judith A. Bovitz, who is 69 years old, has been experiencing this for years. After every step taken to remedy the situation internally failed, she filed a Federal Lawsuit last month against Wells Fargo Advisors (“Wells Fargo” or the “Company”).Continue reading

Nooses in the Workplace: A Disturbing Trend

Noose, workplace, eeoc, discriminationA noose is placed on a desk or a chair, or on a door or in a locker. The symbolism is clear. Nooses in the workplace are meant to intimidate because of race. The noose of the hangman is meant to be a frightening visual representation of the harassment that included thousands of black people who died at the hands of lynch mobs following the civil war and on into the twentieth century. This history has led to symbolic use of a noose. It has long been a tool of various hate groups. The turning up of nooses in the workplace has been having an affect on black employees, and that affect has been spilling over to affect other minorities.
 
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) officials and law enforcement officials report on this trend. While companies routinely try to settle nooses in the workplace cases out of court, the EEOC are always pursuing dozens of such cases. The EEOC point out that, when in seen light of their overall caseload, these cases are disproportionally high.  The EEOC maintains that nooses in the workplace is a growing trend.
 
Every case of nooses in the workplace has its own distinctive characteristics, but there seem to be elements common to most of the cases brought forward. The noose is almost never the only method of intimidation. Racist slurs, racial epithets, racist jokes, racist graffiti and other ongoing intimidation and harassment usually accompany the noose.
discrimination suit, rascism, workplace
No one knows for sure why these racist incidents have risen lately. Some discrimination attorneys have speculated that there may be a growing intolerance by younger workers not familiar with the civil rights movement and struggles of the 1950’s and 1960’s. The incident may grow out of resentment of some whites over the implementation of affirmative action resulting in diverse workplaces where blacks and minorities were previously excluded.
 
Another reason cited for the rise in such incidents reported to EEOC is a growing number of employers fighting it in court. Some employers are referring to the incidents as banter and horseplay between employees without harmful intentions.Diversity, discrimination, equality, workplace
 
There have been some accusations of minority workers filing false claims for purpose of collecting money. Employment and discrimination attorneys generally agree that a false claim of racially related harassment, violence and misconduct in the workplace is extremely rare. History has borne out that out; there have been only a handful of false claims involving nooses in the workplace. Employment and discrimination attorneys also point out that, when subjected to scrutiny, the false claims are easily brought to light.

Your Cheat Sheet to Understanding the ADA Amendment Act of 2008

The Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted to protect workers across the U.S. from discrimination against disability.  Congress has recently amended the definition of disability within the ADA by instating the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendment Act of 2008.  The March 25, 2011 ruling made significant changes to the ADA, making it easier for individuals to prove they are disabled under the ADAAA’s guidelines.
The changes appear minimal, but will have a sizable impact on the number of citizens classified as disabled. The Amendment is one of the most significant changes in the fight for equality among disabled citizens. It finally provides the disabled an opportunity for protection against unjust discrimination, and implements the necessary change for equality.
We have compiled the most important things you should know about the new ADA Amendment Act.  The ADAAA does the following things:

  1. Provides an interpretation of the word “disability” that is applicable to many impairments that were previously unprotected. The definition of disability remains the same, “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual; a record of such an impairment; or being regarded as having such an impairment.”  However, the ADAAA encourages that the terms in the definition should be interpreted broadly.
  2. Supplies guidelines for determining if the disability is “substantially limiting”. A substantially limiting disability is one that makes a person ”significantly restricted as to the condition, manner, or duration under which a major life activity can be performed, in comparison to the average person or to most people.”  The ADAAA also encourages this term to be interpreted broadly, but further develops the law to include guidelines for future court cases.
    1. Broad construction- The narrow interpretation of the words “impairment” and “substantially limiting” was changed to provide a broader spectrum of the definitions.
    2. Comparison to general population– The disability can be substantially limiting if the person cannot perform a major life activity in comparison to the general population.
    3. Primary issue is compliance, not substantial limitation– Court cases should focus on if the employer was in compliance with the law, rather than focusing on if the disability was, in fact, substantially limiting.
    4. Individualized assessment– all impairments that are alleged to be substantially limiting must be determined on an individual basis.
    5. No requirement for scientific analysis- when the performance of a major life activity by the disabled person is compared to the general population, no scientific, medical or statistical analysis is needed.
    6. No consideration of mitigating measures– when determining if a disability is substantially limiting, mitigating measures (other than ordinary eye glasses or contact lenses) may not be considered.
    7. Episodic impairments or conditions in remission– episodic impairments are still regarded as disabilities when in remission as long as the disability would limit a major life activity when active.
    8. One substantial limitation is sufficient– one determination of a limitation of a major life function is enough to classify an impairment as a protected disability.

 
If you feel that you have been discriminated against because of your disability, contact an attorney to discuss your options.