Wrongful Termination

August 1, 2018

Pregnancy and New Mother Discrimination in the Workplace

Pregnancy discrimination occurs when an employee or job applicant is treated unfavorably due to pregnancy, or a pregnancy-related medical condition. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) prohibits this type of discrimination in the course of any aspect of employment.

When a woman is unable to perform certain job duties due to a pregnancy-related health condition, she must be treated in the same manner as any another temporarily disabled employee would be treated. Further, some impairments that are common during pregnancy, such as preeclampsia and gestational diabetes, are covered disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). As such, employers may have to provide reasonable accommodations for an employee suffering from these temporary medical conditions. Reasonable accommodations could include temporary leave, or modifications to the office, duties, or schedule.

Hostile Work Environment

If a woman feels that she has been harassed, or in any way discriminated against, due to her pregnancy, she may wish to file a discrimination claim. Unlawful discrimination occurs when harassment is frequent and severe enough that it creates a hostile work environment. Discrimination can also occur in the absence of harassment, however. For example, if a pregnant woman is demoted or fired because of her pregnancy or pregnancy-related medical condition, these may be grounds for a discrimination claim. A MA employment law attorney can help you recover damages if you’ve been discriminated against in the workplace.

New Mothers

If temporarily disabled employees are permitted to take disability leave, the same policy must apply to pregnant women. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) provides pregnant employees with additional rights, and many of these rights extend to new mothers. In the past, along with the PDA and FMLA, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act has been used by pregnant employees, and those who have recently become mothers, to fight workplace discrimination. In fact, discrimination lawsuits filed by new mothers and pregnant women have seen a dramatic increase in the last decade, and these lawsuits have a higher success rate than many other types of discrimination lawsuits.

The Right to Express Milk

New mothers often have a need to express milk during working hours. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, which is enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor, nursing mothers have the right to take breaks for the purpose of expressing milk. Employers must provide “reasonable break time for an employee to express breast milk for her nursing child for 1 year after the child’s birth each time such employee has need to express the milk.” In addition, employers must provide “a place, other than a bathroom, that is shielded from view and free from intrusion from coworkers and the public, which may be used by an employee to express breast milk.”

These breaks must be provided as frequently as the nursing mother requires, and for a reasonable amount of time. Although the FLSA does not specifically require employers to compensate nursing mothers during breaks for the purpose of expressing milk, if other types of breaks are already compensated for, the nursing mother must be compensated in the same way. A Boston employment law attorney can help you determine how to proceed if you’ve been discriminated against at work. Continue reading

May 16, 2018

Chipotle Manager’s Wrongful Termination Results in Award of Nearly $8 Million

by Altman & Altman

Last week, an ex-manager of a Chipotle Mexican Grill was awarded close to $8 million in a wrongful termination lawsuit against the restaurant chain. Jeanette Ortiz was accused of stealing more than $600 from a Fresno, California Chipotle in 2015. The alleged theft, which Ortiz’s supervisors claimed was videotaped, was never shown to Ortiz. Her supervisors said the video had been destroyed.

Following her termination, Ortiz filed a lawsuit. Last week, a California jury ruled that the former manager’s termination was in retaliation for a workers’ comp claim she had filed for a work-related injury. Ortiz claims to have suffered carpal tunnel syndrome while working at Chipotle. The Mexican fast-food restaurant was ordered to pay $7.97 million in damages, which includes $1.97 million in lost wages, and $6 million for emotional distress.

How Do You Know if Your Termination Was Legal?

If you’ve recently been fired from a job, and you think your termination was illegal, you may be entitled to compensation. But how do you know if the termination was legal or wrongful? The reality is, most employment is considered to be “at will,” which basically means that any employee can be fired at any time for any reason. That sounds like a blanket statement, but there is one major exception. If the reason itself is illegal, the termination is likely wrongful. An example of an illegal reason for termination would be if an individual is fired because of his race or religion. Such a discriminatory act is prohibited, and thus, would constitute a wrongful termination.

To win a wrongful termination case, however, one must be able to prove that the reason for termination was illegal, or that the termination itself was illegal because it goes against a written or implied promise of employment. For example, if you have a written contract promising job security for one year, and you are fired after six months, you can argue that your employment was not “at-will.” Even an implied promise can suffice, but these are much more difficult to prove. A Boston employment law attorney can help you protect your rights if you’ve been wrongfully terminated. Continue reading

December 5, 2017

Louisville Basketball Coach Fired for “Just Cause,” Brings Lawsuit Against the University

by Altman & Altman

When Rick Pitino was fired for “just cause” as University of Louisville’s head basketball coach in September, the former Boston Celtics coach lost a contract worth about $38.7 million. Last week, Pitino filed a lawsuit against the university’s athletic association, claiming his employer is in breach of contract for firing him when it lacked “just cause” to do so. The lawsuit also claims that his employer failed to properly notify Pitino that he had been placed on administrative leave.

What Was the “Just Cause” for Pitino’s Firing?

According to Louisville, Pitino engaged in misconduct on three grounds:

He knew of, or was involved in, efforts to illegally incentivize basketball recruits to attend Louisville. This includes payments to Brian Bowen’s family. Ironically, although Bowen was a top recruit at the time, he’s now a non-eligible freshman.

He failed to to notify the athletic department’s compliance officers of the presence of Richard Dawkins, an alleged briber, on campus. According to Louisville, in doing so, he violated his contract. Dawkins faces decades in prison for his alleged role in multiple college basketball-related crimes.

When allegations arose about escorts being directed to have sex with certain recruits, he failed to take actions necessary to stop the behavior.

But Pitino denies all of the above. According to his lawsuit, Pitino “never has had any part —active, passive, or through willful ignorance —in any effort, successful or unsuccessful, completed or abandoned, to pay any recruit, or any family member of a recruit, or anyone else on a recruit’s behalf, as an inducement to attend the University of Louisville.” To support his argument, Pitino’s complaint points out that despite a government wiretap, no recorded statements of any wrongdoing on Pitino’s part are cited.

Pitino also claims that he did not have an obligation to report Dawkins’ activities. According to his complaint, “Coach Pitino never understood that Dawkins was an agent, and Bowen’s mother stated that Dawkins was not an agent in any regard for Bowen.”

And with regards to the escorts, Pitino insists that he had zero awareness of these activities.

In addition to his complaints above, Pitino believes that the process by which his termination occurred is another issue. According to his complaint, Louisville failed to conduct a proper investigation or provide sufficient notice prior to his termination. A MA employment law attorney can help you determine how to proceed if you’ve been wrongfully terminated. Continue reading

September 28, 2017

Was I Wrongfully Terminated From My Job?

by Altman & Altman

If you hate your job and decide to stop showing up for work, chances are you’ll get fired. And you aren’t likely to be surprised by that termination. But what if your termination is unjust? Sometimes a worker is terminated for the wrong reasons, and sometimes these reasons are illegal. If you think you’ve been wrongfully terminated from a job, what do you do?

An at-will employee is a worker who can be fired at any time for any reason, with few exceptions. Although most employment is at will, you may have an employment contract that states otherwise. If you have a written contract or statement promising you a certain level of job security, these promises may be legally enforceable.

Implied Promise

Sometimes these promises are made in writing, and sometimes they are verbal. A written promise is significantly easier to prove, but an experienced MA employment law attorney may be able to help you prove that an implied promise existed. In making this determination, courts will look at the following factors:

How long were you employed?
Did you receive positive reviews and job promotions, and how often?
Did your employer violate its usual employment practices in your termination?
Were you promised long-term employment when hired?

Your claim of an implied promise may be supported, for example, if you have been employed at company A for years, have received frequent promotions, and company A failed to provide its standard written warning prior to your termination.

Why Would an Employer Wrongfully Terminate Someone?

Wrongful terminations can occur for many reasons. Some of the most common reasons include

preventing an employee from collecting sales commissions.
replacing a long-term employee with an entry-level employee willing to work for less pay.
discrimination, such as when an employee refuses a supervisor’s sexual advances, or when a supervisor discovers that an employee is gay.

In some cases, an employer will try to avoid a wrongful termination lawsuit by getting the employee to quit on his or her own. To do so, the employer might subject the employee to unpleasant or difficult tasks, such as multiple transfers, dangerous assignments, and unpopular shifts. This is also illegal.

Illegitimate Grounds for Termination

Even at-will employees are protected from termination in certain situations. The following reasons are recognized as illegal grounds for termination:

Missing work for jury duty
Missing work to vote
Missing work to serve in the National Guard or military
Whistleblowing (providing information about harmful or illegal activity)

June 6, 2017

Have You Been Wrongfully Terminated in Massachusetts? We Can Help

by Altman & Altman

If you have been let go from your job recently, but don’t seem to know exactly why, or the explanation you were given doesn’t seem to match your experience at work, it is possible that you have been wrongfully terminated and can bring a claim against your former employer. The following is more information on the laws in Massachusetts regarding wrongful termination as a guide for what to look for in evaluating whether or not you may have a valid claim.

In Massachusetts, employees are considered “at-will”, meaning that both the employee and the employer can terminate employment at any time. While sometimes it is beneficial for the employee in being able to resign and seek employment elsewhere at any time, the sometime unfortunate flip-side to that is that an employee can also be fired or let go at any time as well, and for the most part the employer is not technically obligated to provide a reason for doing so.

The good news is that “for the most part” means that there are exceptions to this rule. There are some instances in which firing an at-will employee can be grounds for a wrongful termination suit. One of the most common ways this can happen is if an employee is fired based on some form of discrimination.

In Massachusetts, the law states that an employer is barred from discriminating against an employee based on “race, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, religion, age, mental or physical disability, genetic information, sexual orientation, gender identity, and activity military status.” If you feel like your termination was based on one of these factors, it is important to report it as quickly as possible so that an investigation can be conducted.

Sometimes, however, it is not always as clear-cut as the above list of factors. Discrimination can be a little more subtle as well, in that in may be based on believing that these factors came into play at some point during your employment at the company, even if the actions didn’t necessarily lead to termination. For example, there is often a case where one employee is not promoted for a position which they were qualified for, “promised” (in a sense), or otherwise felt was deserved. Sometimes, this can coincide with one of the above factors (for instance, maybe an employee believes that because their employer recently found out about their sexual orientation, they chose not to give the employee a promotion because of it). If the employee then goes to file a complaint asserting this belief, and the employer finds out about it, it is illegal for the employer to then use the fact that the employee complained against him as grounds for termination. If this happens, even if the employer did not initially discriminate against the employee for the promotion, the fact that the employer then terminated the employee for filing a complaint for asserting a right (not to be discriminated against for sexual orientation), could be grounds for a wrongful termination suit. Therefore, it is imperative to keep track of actions, statements, and general conduct being displayed by the employer regarding any termination. Even if the employee is at-will, this fact alone is not grounds for an employee to always be fired for no reason whatsoever if the motive behind the termination is discriminatory in nature Continue reading