Stephen Hans Blog by cjleclaire
Employment and Labor Law Attorneys
Jan 16, 2013 | 100965 views | 0 0 comments | 98 98 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

view as list
New York City Affirms Rights to Use Bathrooms Consistent with Gender Identity
by cjleclaire
Aug 17, 2016 | 1526 views | 0 0 comments | 74 74 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink
Author:Stephen Hans & Associates

Media outlets across the country are addressing controversial laws passed recently in certain states that prohibit transgender individuals from using bathrooms consistent with their identity. New state laws require them to use a restroom consistent with the sexual identity on their birth certificates.

New York City has taken its own stand on this issue

Employers should take note that NYC is the first city in the nation to launch a campaign that grants people in NYC the right to use the bathroom consistent with their gender identity — as opposed to genders indicated on birth certificates.

Ads are appearing all over the city in subway cars, bus shelters, phone booths and newspapers along with digital ads across social media. The ads are appearing in multiple languages, including Spanish, Korean, Chinese, Russian and Bengali. They state, “Use the Restroom Consistent with Who You Are” and “Look Past the Pink and Blue.”

This restriction on restroom use is a new type of discrimination is loosely described as bathroom discrimination.

NY has long been at the forefront against transgender and other discrimination issues

NY Governor Andrew M. Cuomo was the first executive in the nation to issue statewide regulations that prohibited transgender discrimination. The regulations went into effect on January 20.2015. New York has long been a champion of human rights and was also the first U.S. state to enact a general anti-discrimination law in 1945.

Under New York law, human rights violations can carry penalties and civil fines up to $50,000. If “willful, wanton or malicious” discrimination fines and penalties may go up to $100,000 and have no caps on compensatory damages awarded to individuals.

Stephen Hans & Associates is an employment litigation firm that defends small and medium sized businesses in discrimination, labor law and other employment related matters.

comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

DOL Sets Overtime Rules Affecting the Restaurant Industry
by cjleclaire
Jul 20, 2016 | 4888 views | 0 0 comments | 225 225 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

Author: Stephen D.Hans & Associates

DOL Sets Overtime Rules Affecting the Restaurant Industry

Whether you own a fast food restaurant or a fine dining establishment, you must now pay your salaried workers overtime if they meet new qualifications set by the Department of Labor (DOL).

This means fast food restaurant managers, head cooks, sous chefs, pastry chefs and sommeliers working a salaried job that pays $47,476 or less, now qualify for overtime pay. They receive time and a half for hours that exceed 40 a week. The exemptions for salaried employees have new limits and regardless of whether the employee is hourly or salaried, overtime rules apply.

How Does the New DOL Overtime Rule Compare with Past Rules?

The DOL released the new rule in May 2016. The limit on salaried workers who could collect overtime had stayed at $23,660 since 2004. Here are some relevant facts for owners in the restaurant industry:

  • Average wages in the U.S. for chefs, head cooks and pastry chefs are $45,920
  • Bakers’ wages average is around $26,270
  • Culinary Journalists’ mean wage is $46,560
  • The majority of these employees work 50 or more hours per week

(Information from Eatery.com)

Restaurant Worker overtime pay

Most Common Ways for Employers to Deal with the New Law

To continue to cover costs and also deal with additional overtime pay, employers will most likely do one or more of the following:

  • Pay higher salaries
  • Cut work hours to no more than 40 per week
  • Raise menu prices

When Does the Overtime Rule Go into Effect?

The rule goes into effect December 1, 2016. Every three years, beginning in 2020 the DOL will modify the overtime threshold to match the 40th percentile income of the country’s lowest income area, which is the Southeast.

Stay on Top of Changing Laws as an Employer

At Stephen Hans & Associates, our firm helps small and middle sized business owners deal with legal changes. We understand how difficult it is to stay apprised of new laws while managing in the daily demands of running a restaurant.

We do not just keep you informed. We also provide legal guidance and representation to help you protect your rights and assist you with policies that avoid liability.

comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

New York City, Queens, Employment Defense Lawyers
by cjleclaire
Jul 08, 2016 | 5879 views | 0 0 comments | 273 273 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

Salient Points about the Carlson-Ailes Sexual Discrimination Lawsuit

The media is full of reports about the lawsuit Gretchen Carlson, former Fox anchor woman and television host brought against Fox News CEO Roger Ailes.

Ms. Carlson claims that the chairman of Fox News, Roger Ailes terminated her employment because she refused to go along with his sexual advances. After she complained about being discriminated against as an anchorwoman in the newsroom, she alleges that he demoted her to a less prestigious position, reduced her salary, curtailed her on-air appearances and declined to renew her contract last month. She is seeking compensatory damages for sexual harassment and retaliation.

According to The New York Times , Ms. Carlson described Mr. Ailes as a serial sexual harasser and the network as a boy’s club environment.

What Makes This Case Stand Out from Other Discrimination Cases

What sets this case apart from other cases is the fact that Mr. Ailes holds such a prominent position in the media. He claims the allegations are false, are a retaliatory action for not renewing Ms. Carlson’s contract and called the lawsuit defamatory. Ailes’ corporate boss, Rupert Murdoch supports him in the defense against the allegations.

The lawsuit names Mr. Ailes as the sole defendant and not Fox News network.

Tactics Being Used in the Case

Ms. Carlton’s legal team has employed various strategies in handling the case, notwithstanding the use of the media to do the following:

  • Distribute copies of the complaint to reporters across a variety of disciplines
  • Twitter thanks offered by Ms. Carlson for outpouring support
  • Hashtag: #StandWith Gretchen
  • Prominently post information about the lawsuit on Gretchen’s personal website

It will be interesting to see how the case plays out in the media and the courtroom.

Stephen Hans & Associates is an employment litigation firm that defends small and medium sized businesses in discrimination, labor law and other employment related matters.

New York City, Queens, Employment Defense Lawyers

comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

Dominoes Pizza Sued for Wage and Hour Violations
by cjleclaire
Jun 14, 2016 | 6341 views | 0 0 comments | 286 286 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

Recently New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed a lawsuit against Domino’s Pizza for underpaying staff.

According to Legal Reader, last year the Attorney General’s Office settled for $1.5 million with 12 Domino’s franchisees found to be underpaying workers. This is the second lawsuit the Attorney General has brought against Dominoes Pizza, and the current lawsuit includes the following allegations:

  • Failure to pay overtime
  • Failure to reimburse delivery staff for gas miles
  • Failure to reimburse delivery staff for wear and tear on bicycles

Are Wage and Hour Violations the Franchisee’s or Franchisor’s Liability?

The Dominoes Pizza parent company (franchisor) argues that wage and hour violations are the individual franchise owner’s (franchisee) liability and not the Dominoes parent company’s liability. Yet, the Attorney General names both as parties in the case. Typically wage and hour lawsuits exclude franchisors and only target franchisees. However, a landmark case where the National Labor Relations Board is suing McDonald’s may set a precedent that makes franchisors jointly liable for a franchisee’s violations.

Dominoes claimed that for more than three years it had collaborated with franchisees to bring them into compliance with wage and hour laws but that it is not obligated to do so.

Details of the Lawsuit

Because the parent company instructs franchisees to use its computerized payroll system, Schneiderman alleges that the parent company bares equal liability for underpaying workers.

He also stated that his office discovered that Dominoes Pizza headquarters was extensively involved in with franchises and how they operated and actually caused many of the pay violations.

Rely on Experienced Legal Counsel

Small and large businesses alike should consult with experienced legal counsel to limit liability and ensure compliance with labor and employment laws.

At Stephen Hans & Associates, our Queens, NYC employment defense firm brings decades of legal experience to the table. We can help you protect your rights and put policies in place to avoid liability.

comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

Restaurants Can Throw Dog Lovers a Bone
by cjleclaire
May 24, 2016 | 8414 views | 0 0 comments | 373 373 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

NYC Employment Defense Attorney

“I’m so pleased that the city Department of Health threw dog lovers a bone,” Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal (D-Manhattan) was quoted as saying by The New York Daily News. She sponsored the NYC law that allows dining with dogs.

Restaurant owners already have many regulations to abide by and under the previous law, restaurants were required to verify the dog owner’s licensing and vaccination documents before allowing the dog owner and dog in outdoor restaurant areas. Despite the fact that laws allowed dogs in outdoor areas, this strict requirement kept dog lovers away.

As a restaurant owner, did you know…?

Under new changes in the law, now restaurants simply must post signs that dogs accompanying their owners must be licensed and vaccinated for rabies.

The objective of the legal change was to create a balance that gave dog lovers greater freedoms and still protected other diners at the same time. Restaurant owners are still obligated by law to keep the outdoor dining area separate from pedestrians and dogs on the sidewalk. Also, dogs cannot touch dining table surfaces or obstruct aisle space.

It’s difficult to keep up with regulatory and legal changes. This change is good news for restaurants that allow dogs because it will help them attract more business.

Anymore, the responsibilities of running a business include being legally savvy to protect your rights and interests. Through effective legal guidance, our attorneys at Stephen Hans & Associates can keep you informed and help you protect your rights as a business owner.

 
comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

EEOC Alleges Discrimination Based on Applications Requiring Medical History
by cjleclaire
May 11, 2016 | 7566 views | 0 0 comments | 221 221 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

Queens, New York City Employment Defense Firm

As employers, when you ask for medical information on a job application, you raise a red flag for the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) and set yourself up for a lawsuit. No matter how reasonable it seems to ask an applicant about medical history, simply refrain from doing it.

EEOC vs. Grisham Farm Products

Recently the EEOC filed a lawsuit against Grisham Farm Products. The company required applicants to fill out three pages of medical history. An applicant refused to fill out the information recently and the company told him he would not be considered for the job. He had a disability and the health information requirement on an application violates the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). It also violates the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), according the EEOC.

Businesses Targeted for ADA Violations

According to the National Law Review, the EEOC is targeting businesses that ask for medical history on job applications.

The EEOC fact sheet indicates it has gone after 200 businesses since 2011 that the EEOC alleges were in violation of the ADA. Lawsuits involved employees with the following types of disabilities:

  • Intellectual disabilities
  • Psychiatric Disabilities
  • Epilepsy
  • Cancer
  • HIV
  • Diabetes
  • Renal Failure

Large, nationwide businesses have been sued, including:

  • Walgreen
  • Kmart
  • UPS
  • AutoZone
  • Dillard’s
  • United Airlines
  • Verizon Maryland
  • Dollar General
  • Papa John’s
  • Target

If you have questions about whether or not you may be liable because you failed to hire a disabled job applicant or have questions about how to deal with issues regarding a disabled worker, get a legal opinion.

At Stephen Hans & Associates, our attorneys can provide you with sound legal guidance and help you stay in compliance with state and federal laws.

 

comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

Restaurants Weigh in on Replacing Tipping with Service Charges
by cjleclaire
Apr 19, 2016 | 9440 views | 0 0 comments | 313 313 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

Queens New York Employment Defense Attorneys

Human Resource Consulting Law Firm

Various restaurants across the country are in the process of changing tipping into service charges. The Seattle Eater published an article about a restaurant called Mollusk that eliminated tipping and replaced it with a 20 percent service charge. However, after implementing the change, this restaurant and brewery struggled.

The Chef/Owner of the business said he split the service charge equally between kitchen employees and front-house employees, who deal directly with customers. Kitchen employees’ wages increased from about $15 to $18 per hour. However, the loss in customers resulted in servers, bartenders and hosts making considerably less money.

To make up for income loss, restaurant management cut staff and dropped its lunch menu service in January. The owner had to reinstate tipping and also increased the restaurant’s menu prices by 10 percent to help kitchen staff earn higher wages. Fortunately, the neighborhood is a fast-growing area, and the restaurant hopes to increase its business soon based on population increases.

Is the service charge model a failure business-wise?

It depends on restaurant management, the location and the extent that customers prefer tipping. The Mollusk wants to go back to the service charge model after it gets the business boost it needs right now.

The News Tribune reports that Indochina Asian Dining Lounge in Tacoma, WA implemented an 18 percent service charge in June 2015. As of January 2016, the change was successful and servers average $20 to $25 per hour while kitchen staff earn between $15 and $20.

Another restaurant owner in Philadelphia says he is doing well with the service charge model. According to Second Nexus, William Street Common’s owner says he’s hitting numbers that other restaurants get with the tipping model. Downfalls of tipping involve people who tip based on:

  • How fast the food arrives
  • Whether the restaurant runs out of a particular dish
  • Whether the servers were there when the customer wanted them to be

These poor management decisions shouldn’t influence servers’ tips.

Even so, in many regions Americans prefer tipping compared to service charges.

Are you thinking about implementing service charges instead of tipping in your restaurant business? We recommend you get a legal opinion first.

At Stephen Hans & Associates, our attorneys routinely consult with business owners to help them comply with state and federal laws. Doing business in today’s world often requires reliable legal guidance.

 
comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

University Policies to Deal with Sexual Harassment Issues
by cjleclaire
Mar 01, 2016 | 13883 views | 0 0 comments | 396 396 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

Recently, a sexual harassment case involving a Chicago professor became high profile in the news. While you can view the case from the perspective of the victim and the alleged abuser, there is also the viewpoint of educational institutions to consider. What preventative actions can they take to protect themselves against lawsuits?

The New York Times  reported that a well-known molecular biologist, who was a professor at the University of Chicago resigned after the university recommended he be fired. The administration based the termination recommendation on violations of the college’s sexual misconduct policy. Professor Jason Lieb allegedly made unwanted sexual advances toward several female graduate students during an off campus retreat attended by graduate students and several faculty members. As a result of the allegations, Lieb resigned.

An incident of sexual misconduct also arose when Lieb worked at the University of North Carolina. However, an investigation at that time revealed no evidence to support the claim. When Lieb left the University of North Carolina and Princeton interviewed him for a position, Lieb gave permission for Princeton staff to examine his UNC personnel file. The University of Chicago also examined his UNC personnel file and found no evidence that proved him guilty of the allegation. Consequently, the Chicago department of human genetics voted unanimously to hire him. Weighing the responsibility to protect sexual harassment victims versus false sexual harassment allegations can be difficult.

Obviously, background checks are vital for educational institutions when hiring personnel. Also, these types of incidents bring up questions about whether the standards universities currently use to evaluate candidates during the hiring process are adequate.

At Stephen Hans & Associates, we work with businesses and institutions to help you put policies in place that protect you against sexual harassment and other discrimination liability.

comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

What Else You, as an Employer, Should Know About Telephone Calls
by cjleclaire
Feb 16, 2016 | 13534 views | 1 1 comments | 399 399 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink
Author: Stephen D. Hans & Associates

Many employees today wear headsets for phone conversations because it frees their hands to type and check facts on the computer. While their headsets are still on, employees often speak with each other as well. The question arises, can employers monitor their employees’ conversations? The answer is yes, in the same way an employer can monitor employees’ conversations with clients or customers. However, if the headset has a mute button, then an employee can put the headset on mute when not using the telephone.

Other legal ways for employers to monitor phone activity is through a register, which is a device that keeps a record of numbers dialed and the amount of time spent on each call. These records can help employers analyze call times or calls into certain areas with sales or other phone activities for effectiveness. For example, is there a correlation between longer calls and sales? Or is the company making a lot of sales in a particular demographic or location?

Private Rights Clearinghouse indicates that as an employer, you may run into employees who believe you are using the register unfairly to evaluate their efficiency. Employees may accuse you of not taking into account their quality of performance. So, it is important to know your legal rights as an employer and ensure you also have methods in place to evaluate an employee’s performance fairly.

At Stephen Hans & Associates, we often answer questions like these, and of course, each situation has its own unique and specific concerns. For this reason, if you run into problems, you should schedule a consultation so you can get a legal opinion that takes all the facts into consideration.

comments (1)
view/post comments
Jaclyn Graham
|
February 22, 2016
I have not much experience about office call but just to know about call center's call that purpose to generate sale or provide service.

What About Your Rights as an Employer to Monitor an Employee’s Social Media Accounts?
by cjleclaire
Feb 10, 2016 | 13441 views | 0 0 comments | 426 426 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

While in some states employers are able to establish company policies that limit what employees can post about employers, New York’s laws protect the employee’s privacy rights.

First of all, New York State law prohibits you from asking employees for the username or password to their social media accounts. It also prohibits accessing these accounts through other electronic means, which protects employees’ privacy regarding these accounts. The New York State Privacy Protection and Internet Safety Act determines when and how online personal and private information can be destroyed and establishes responsibilities and enforcement.

(See the National Conference of State Legislatures )

In general, you can’t discipline an employee for something posted about your company on the internet unless you can prove that the post resulted in damages.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has general policies in place advising employers not to establish rules that prevent employees from discussing wages or working conditions with each other. However, if an employee is critical of the company and complaints are not in relation to group activities among employees, then the employee is probably liable. Situations vary depending on the facts involved.

If you’re concerned that an employee is posting opinions on Facebook or some other social media outlet that is damaging your company’s reputation or resulting in lost income, consult with one of our attorneys at Stephen Hans & Associates

comments (0)
view/post comments
no comments yet

page
2 3 .. 9