Workplace Discrimination or Harassment? What Should You Do!!

Workplace Discrimination or Harassment? What Should You Do!! by James Vagnini{Read in 6 minutes}  Recently I posted an article reminding employees that they must file a harassment complaint within 180-300 days after the latest occurrence. While working on that blog, the question came up about what an employee should do if they are the victim of harassment.
Report the Behavior
First and foremost, report the questionable behavior to someone in your Human Resources (HR) department. The company is not expected to have eyes and ears everywhere; internally,  most of them require their employees to report incidents, and the law also requires employees to report incidents themselves.Continue reading

Supervisor sues Omni hotels, alleging sexual harassment and retaliation when she reported it

A former supervisor with Omni Hotels & Resorts has filed suit against the Dallas-based company, alleging sexual harassment and saying the company broke federal laws governing equal pay.Continue reading

Does Lack of State Level Prohibition Allow Discrimination in Texas?

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
gender discrimination texasMost 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
workplace discrimination texasAccording 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
education discrimination texasAccording 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
employment discrimination texasInsurance 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 Job Search and Discrimination by Age

justice, discrimination, law, lawyer, new york
When employers shut you out because you exceed some arbitrary age limit, this can be exceedingly frustrating. Not only is the employer perpetrating an obvious injustice, in many cases, it may be clear that you are best candidate for the position. There are laws prohibiting many types of discrimination. U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces these laws. It behooves an employer to know the relevant laws and regulations. Age is one of the areas of discrimination covered by laws.
Employers are not to treat job applicants or existing employees less favorably because of their age. Current law, covered by Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), applies to employees and job candidates equally. The law applies to people age forty and over. Employers can favor an older employee over a younger employee but not the other way around. The law applies even if both employees are over forty. In other words you cannot hire a 45 year old worker over a 55 year old employee due to age.
Work Contexts and Age Discrimination
age discrimination, age, workplaceThe law covers discrimination in many aspects including hiring, termination, pay level and pay raises, work assignments, promotions, layoffs, benefits, training and general working conditions.
 
Harassment and Age Discrimination

Law forbids harassment due to age. Examples of such harassment could include offensive remarks about a workers age. Harassment is not everyday good-humored banter or an isolated remark. However, if the banter and remarks become so severe and frequent that it creates a work environment that is hostile or offensive, that is harassment and prohibited by law. If the adverse treatment due to age results in negative employment decisions, such as termination, that is considered harassment and prohibited by law. It will be considered harassment if it is the victim’s manager or supervisor, a coworker or even someone who is not an employee such as client or vendor.
Policies, Practices and Age Discrimination
 Policies and practices implemented by an employer need to be applied to everyone without regard to age. When applied, policies and practices can be illegal if they can be shown to have harmed or impacted negatively employees forty year old or older due to their age. Areas commonly effected include:
work, policy

  • Training and apprenticeship programs.
  • Want ads and job notices.
  • Employment inquiries.
  • Benefits and retirement policies.

Any employer with more than twenty employees is subject to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. It also applies to all government agencies, federal, state and local.

Retaliation – Employees Should Not Fear Reporting Discrimination –

Employees who have been discriminated or harassed against in the workplace should not be hesitant to report these claims.  Retaliation laws are in place to protect the employee from being harassed or targeted after they exercise their right to report discrimination.  When an employee reports discriminatory acts to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, their respective state equivalent, the Department of Labor, or even internally to their employer, retaliation laws are in place to stop the employer from taking adverse action against the wronged employee.
 
Retaliation laws protect against all forms of retaliation.  Retaliatory actions include, but are not limited to:
–          Disparate Hiring Practices
–          Unwarranted Firing
–          Pay Reductions
–          Change in Job Assignments
–          Promotion Discrepancies
–          Layoffs
–          Unwarranted Training Procedures
–          Denial of Fringe Benefits
–          Alteration of any other Term or Condition of Employment.
 
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is a federal agency in place to protect the rights of employees.  It is “an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against any of his employees…because the employee has opposed any practice made unlawful employment practice by Title VII.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a).  EEOC Retaliation laws bar the employer from exercising any retaliatory acts, even retroactively, against an employee after they file an EEOC Charge of Discrimination.  Employees should not fear reporting discrimination because the EEOC is an agency to rectify these wrongs.
 
Most states have a functional state equivalent to the EEOC and this is another avenue for discriminated employees to use to remedy the harassment they have endured.  In New York specifically, New York Labor Law Article 20-C § 740 is in place to forbid an employer from taking retaliatory actions against an employee who reports discrimination in the work place.  New York employees have protection at both the Federal and State level when exercising their right to be free of discriminatory actions taken by their employer.  For employees working in New York City, they even have a third layer of protection under the New York City Human Rights Law.
 
Employees do not have to report acts of discrimination to one of these agencies in order to be afforded protection under these anti-retaliation laws.  An employee is safeguarded against retaliation in any form when they complain about discrimination or harassment directly to their employer by complaining to Human Resources, management or some equivalent.  It is vital, however, when complaining directly to your employer, that the aggrieved employee document their complaint of discrimination or harassment in some manner, whether through a formal document, email, or in the presence of a trusted witness.

 
For an employee to prove they have been retaliated against, they only need to show that the retaliation has produced “an injury or harm.” Burlington Northern & Sante Fe Ry. V. White, 548 U.S. 53, 67 (2006).  The injury or harm requirement must however stem from or convey a feeling or perception of discrimination.  Employees should not be weary of reporting acts of retaliation, but should exercise their right to be free of these acts.  Retaliation can also occur if someone has been negatively affected by your report of discrimination.  The EEOC’s Retaliation laws protect the rights of third–parties, even though they have not made claims of discrimination themselves. Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP (2011).  For a more detailed discussion on how third-parties are protected by the law, check back to see further blog discussion on our website.

Workplace Bullying Cases are Hard to Prove

Workplace bullying can be found in offices across America, but few laws regulate or protect workers from such verbal abuse or mistreatment.  Workplace bullying is defined by the Workplace Bullying Institute as “repeated, health-harming mistreatment…in one or more of the following forms: verbal abuse, threatening, humiliating or offensive behavior/actions, work interference, sabotage which prevents work from getting done”.
Title VII and other anti-discrimination laws protect workers if they belong to a specific protected class based on race, gender, national origin, age, and other characteristics.  However, if you cannot establish that workplace bullying is based on one the protected classes covered by laws against discrimination, Title VII and other anti-discrimination laws will not prove useful.  This leaves other majority groups virtually unprotected from workplace bullying.
Why has the U.S. not enacted a federal workplace bullying law?  There are many objections to bullying regulations.  First, it is hard to classify certain actions as bullying, as American workers are regularly subject to criticism and high demands.  Second, the context of bullying varies from industry to industry.  For example, a resident at a hospital may be subject to more pressure and intensity than other occupations because of the nature of the work.
There is an effective method to determine workplace bullying in the court system, but the terms of the system are susceptible to the interpretations of the court.  The Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress claim provides the groundwork to prove that certain workplace bullying may be intentional and causes extreme emotional distress.  The plaintiff must prove four elements of IIED in order to win in court:

  1. Intentional or Reckless Conduct
  2. Extreme and Outrageous conduct
  3. The actions of the wrongdoer caused the plaintiff  emotional distress
  4. Emotional distress must be severe

The second element of the IIED claim is the most difficult to prove.  Many cases of workplace bullying do not fall under this category, because harassment or verbal abuse is not often considered as outrageous.  If it is determined that the conduct is outrageous, it must also be proven that severe emotional distress was the result.  The plaintiff must also establish that emotional distress is so vast they suffered a compensable injury.
If you feel that you have suffered emotional distress based upon bullying in the workplace, consult an attorney to discuss a potential suit.  Although many cases are not severe enough for court, an attorney may provide advice based upon your circumstances and conditions.

"Civil rights law is their passion" – Newsday

James Vagnini, Sara Kane and Rob Valli
James Vagnini, Sara Kane and Rob Valli

As most lawyers know, civil rights cases are not where the real money is in the legal profession. But one Long Island law firm has barreled into discrimination cases in the South in the past few years, citing a passion for such work.
“We do the old-fashioned civil rights work,” saidJames Vagnini, one of the three partners at Garden City-based Valli Kane & Vagnini. “If I didn’t make a nickel, I’d be just as happy. I’ve learned a lot. I wanted to do law in a way that I could sleep at night.”
The firm is making money, the partners say. But the cases have taken them into some parts of the Lone Star State where media reports indicate race relations have reached a low point in recent years.
The firm was recently in ParisTexas, where the town’s largest employer is pipe-manufacturer Turner Industries. Black employees have said that hangman’s nooses, Confederate flags and racist graffiti have appeared at the workplace.
Last week, Valli Kane obtained from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission a “reasonable cause” letter, saying the federal agency believes discrimination has occurred at Turner and asking the company and its black employees to sit down and discuss the matter.
In response, Turner said it has formed an employee task force “to assist in promoting and maintaining a workplace that is free of harassment or discrimination.” Turner said it has “zero tolerance” for any discrimination in the workplace.
In 2008, Valli Kane took another case to the EEOC, this one in Dallas involving Allied Aviation Services Inc., which agreed to pay $1.9 million to settle a harassment lawsuit filed on behalf of black and Hispanic workers.
The law firm was formed about two years ago. The three met when they worked together at Leeds, Morelli & Brown, a law firm in Carle Place.
Previously, Vagnini had worked for the New York City Human Rights Commission while a law student at Hofstra University in Hempstead. Robert Valli Jr. had been a Queens assistant district attorney, and Sara Kane was an assistant attorney at the New York City Corporation Counsel.
The firm also handles criminal and real estate cases, but Vagnini said more than 75 percent of its work is civil rights or discrimination cases.
“We have a passion for this,” Kane said.

Sweeney v. United States Postal Service (Mail Carriers)

This action was instituted by a group of Smithtown Postal workers who oppose actions by the USPS and its agencies which illegally targeted older employees in an effort to force them into retirement. In doing this, the USPS utilized various techniques including creating a hostile work environment, overly disciplining older employees, and further harassing and insulting older workers. These policies violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”).
Downloads:

  1. USPS Smithtown Age Discrimination Complaint

Workers sue Baton Rouge company for discrimination

James Vagnini of Valli Kane and Vagnini
James Vagnini of Valli Kane and Vagnini

By Tyana Williams – bio | email
BATON ROUGE, LA (WAFB) – O
ver 200 African-American employees at Turner Industries in Baton Rouge say for years, they’ve been discriminated against and harassed while on the job.
According to lawyers for the employees, documents show last March, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found Turner Industries violated the rights of several black workers. Attorneys say they filed suit because the company failed to address the EEOC’s findings.
For two years, Turner employees say they’ve been keeping track of what they call discrimination and harassment at work.  Tuesday at a rally, attorney James Vagnini showed racially-charged photos he says came from those employees who work in Paris, Texas to Lake Charles, Louisiana and here in Baton Rouge.
“I have a woman standing behind me that came back to her workplace, her slick suit had been stuffed with plastic and they hung it from a noose and sprayed her name across front of it,” said Vagnini.
Vagnini filed the lawsuit in Texas on behalf of 230 Turner employees from Texas and Louisiana.
The 300 page lawsuit alleges black employees witnessed hangman’s nooses at work, faced segregation in the workplace and during the 2008 presidential election were told they could have November 5 off to go vote, even though the election was November 4.
The suit also alleges some workers were bussed to another plant for work, where a white supervisor separated them by race.  The suit says the supervisor hired the white workers and told the black employees to leave.
“I work hard all my life and I can say I know I didn’t deserve that,” said Ethel Jones.  Jones says she was one of 13 black workers told to leave.
She says several times she was told if the racial graffiti in the bathrooms offended her, paint over it.
“Draw pictures of black ladies and say this is a black woman with your legs spread open,” Jones said.
Vagnini says Turner owes its black employees more than an apology.  But he says now the court will decide.
“It is the sentiment this company has toward minorities and it must change,” Vagnini said.
In a written statement, Turner Industries denies it has unlawfully harassed or discriminated against employees because of race.  They say some workers named in the lawsuit have never or no longer work for the company.
Turner Industries released the following statement:
Turner Industries denies that it has unlawfully harassed or discriminated against any employees because of their race or any other criteria.
Roland Toups, Turner Industries’ Chairman and CEO stated, “Make no mistake, Turner Industries stands for diversity and inclusion for all. Our record supports that.  We intend to defend our company and the jobs of our 15,000 employees who are employed in various divisions of the company.  We also assure our customers that our 50 years in the business and our commitments to them shall remain strong and true.
This suit was filed following a lengthy campaign by plaintiffs’ attorneys from New York and Texas to encourage individuals to file claims against the company.   Some of the individuals named in the suit have never worked for Turner Industries.  Most are no longer employed with the company.  Furthermore, many of the claimants who had filed charges raised claims during periods in which they were not even employed with the company.   Many have also returned to work for Turner Industries several times.   Records show that relatively few actually reported complaints of discrimination or harassment to the company.
Toups continued: “We have asked every Turner Industries employee to stay focused on safely performing their jobs. We also have asked them to support the company by making sure that our workplace is compliant with the company’s equal employment opportunity and anti-harassment policies. If there is a problem, we want to know about it so that it can be addressed.”
Last year, Turner Industries addressed racial claims arising at its Paris, Texas pipe fabrication facility.  Most of the named plaintiffs in the current lawsuit never worked in Paris.
Turner Industries intends to aggressively defend the allegations in this suit as well as its record of providing excellent employment opportunities for residents nation-wide.  We will remain committed to providing excellent jobs and employment opportunities for all qualified applicants without regard to race.   That will never change.
Original Article: https://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=13951136