Is your Leave going to exceed the 12 weeks provided by FMLA? You could still be protected under the ADA.

Posted by Mansell Law on

It is common scenario where an employee’s leave of absence for a serious medical condition exceeds the 12 weeks provided for by the Family Medical Leave Act. So what can an employee do in this situation? An employee can request an extended leave of absence as a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (Remember: it is the employees burden to request a reasonable accommodation). This request then shifts the burden to the employer to show that an extended leave would cause “undue hardship.” Read the full article on Extended Leave under the FMLA and ADA.

For more information on the ADA, reasonable accommodations, and what constitutes undue hardship, check out the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ADA fact sheet.

Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: Proposed Bill Extends Protection for Pregnant Women

Posted by Mansell Law on

Currently, pregnant women are a protected class under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, an Amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The new bill would extend protection to female employees with pregnancy-related work limitations, forcing employers to make reasonable accommodations and preventing them from terminating pregnant women due to inhibited performance. For more information related to Pregnancy Discrimination and the proposed law visit these links:
Pregnancy Discrimination Act (Current Law)
Facts on the Pregnancy Discrimination Act
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: Proposed Language
New York Times Article on Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

When is Third Party Retaliation an Actionable Claim?

Posted by Mansell Law on

The Supreme Court has held that an employer can be found liable for terminating an employee when that employee’s fiance has engaged in a protected activity (Opposing discrimination, complaining about harassment, etc.) under Title VII (Discrimination). So what relationship needs to exist between the Third Party and the individual engaging in the protective activity to have an actionable claim? The Supreme Court has provided a factor test: Justice Scalia suggests that there are two factors that determine whether third-party retaliation is unlawful under Title VII: 1. The nature of the relationship; and 2. The severity of the employer’s action. Thus, he states: “We expect that firing a close family member will almost always meet the Burlington standard, and inflicting a milder reprisal on a mere acquaintance will almost never do so.” Read more on Unlawful Third Party Retaliation.

Statute of Limitations Tolled During Time Motion for Conditional Certification Pending

Posted by Mansell Law on

In a recent case, a federal Court has held the Statute of Limitations tolled while a Motion for Class Certification is pending. Unlike the filing of a Class Action under Rule 23, the filing of a Collective Action does not toll the Statute of Limitations. Therefore, the 2 year (or 3 year if willful) statute of limitations continues to run and unpaid overtime or other violations may “fall off” until the Court tolls the Statute of Limitation or, as this Colorado Court held, a motion for Conditional Certification is filed. Read the Full Article Here.

Employer Requiring No Restrictions or To Be “100% Healed” before Returning to Work?

Posted by Mansell Law on

Is your employer requiring you to be 100% or requiring your doctor to release you back to work with no restrictions? This article deals with the potential legal violations associated with such requirements. For example, the Americans with Disabilities Act only requires you to be qualified. Qualified is defined as able to perform the essential functions of your job with or without a reasonable accommodation. Therefore, if you have restrictions but are able to perform your job with an accommodation, you are entitled to work. For other examples, Read the Full Article Here.