Decatur Legal

Settlement Reached in Pregnancy Discrimination Suit Against Chick-Fil-A Franchisee

As detailed in the article, Chick-Fil-A Franchisee at Concord Commons to Pay $10,000 to Settle EEOC Pregnancy Discrimination Suit, Heather Morrison, who was six months pregnant at the time, interviewed with a Chick-Fil-A franchise owner for a team member position. During her interview, the owner asked such questions as how many months she had been pregnant; her expected delivery date; her childcare plans after giving birth; and how much maternity leave she planned to take. The owner called Ms. Morrison three days after the interview and informed her that she did not get the job, but to let the company know after she had given birth and made proper childcare arrangements.

After attempts to settle with the franchise failed, a suit was filed by the EEOC, alleging that the owner of the Chick-fil-A franchise was in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. “Working women who choose to have children shouldn’t be treated differently from other employees or applicants simply because they are pregnant, ” stated regional attorney for the EEOC’s Charlotte District Office.

In addition to the $10,000 settlement to paid to Ms. Morrison, Chick-Fil-A is required to to develop and implement a policy that prohibits future pregnancy discrimination, conduct annual preventive training on pregnancy discrimination for all Chick-Fil-A employess, and finally, the company is required to report all job openings to the EEOC for a two year period, in addition to its hiring decisions regarding pregnant applicants.

If you or someone you know thinks they have experienced discrimination due pregnancy, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609 or use our contact form.

7 Tips To Winning Your Claim for Unpaid Overtime

Our attorneys are experienced in representing employees in claims for unpaid wages, including unpaid overtime. If you believe your employer is not paying you in accordance with the law, please contact us today. The tips below represent issues that we see arise again and again in these types of case. We hope you will find them useful. This is for informational purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice.

1. Know the basics. For most workers considered “non-exempt” under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the law requires that the employee must be paid “overtime” pay for all hours worked over 40 per week, at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay. In addition, FLSA requires payment of a “minimum wage” ($7.25 per hour, as of June 10, 2014). If you are working more than 40 hours per week, and not being paid overtime for this work; or if you are not being paid at least minimum wage, the law allows you to bring a civil suit in federal court to recover double all unpaid wages. Many attorneys, including our firm, are willing to take these cases on a contingency basis, because the law also allows attorneys to recover a reasonable fee for their work, if they prevail.

2. Record your hours worked. Your employer may not be keeping up with your actual hours worked. This may be because the employer has improperly classified you as a “salaried” or otherwise “exempt” employee. Your employer may also be calling you an “independent contractor” in order to avoid the obligations that an employer owes to his employees. Don’t let any of this deter you from keeping a record of the hours you actually work. You will strengthen your hand if you can produce a detailed record of the hours you’ve actually worked. You can use a notebook, a computer program, or whatever works for you to keep up with your time.

3. Keep track of any “off the clock” work. Another common wage and hour issue is employers requiring their employees to do work “off the clock,” for which they are not paid. However, in general, if you are working on-site, performing tasks for the benefit of your employer, you should be compensated for that time. Some examples of this includes “prep work” for your regular duties, such as preparing food to be cooked, filling out start-of-day paperwork, and time spent putting on any specialized uniform of equipment. Keep track of how much time you spend doing this work.

4. Remember: labels are not important. Many employers try to avoid overtime by telling their employees they are “exempt” from the Fair Labor Standards Act, either because they are paid a salary, because they are an “independent contractor,” or various other excuses. Oftentimes, employers will classify someone as a “manager” or a “supervisor,” even though the vast majority of their duties involve taking orders, and not giving them. Don’t take for granted the label placed on your job by the employer. The employer may not know what he or she is talking about, and he may even be intentionally shirking the law. A knowledgeable attorney can help you to decipher whether you are in fact entitled to overtime compensation.

5. Evaluate your duties. In general, if you spend most of your time working under the supervision of another, if you do not have significant discretion as to the manner and means of doing your job, or if your time is spent primarily doing manual labor, you should probably be classified as “non-exempt” from the overtime laws. You should be getting paid by the hour, and paid time-and-a-half for all hours worked over 40 per week. If you believe your employer is improperly denying you overtime pay, an experienced attorney can help you to evaluate whether your duties truly make you exempt or not.

6. Speak up! This is a tough one. Many employees are afraid to speak up at their workplaces because they fear retaliation. The law does forbid retaliation. Nonetheless, the fear remains. This is ultimately a choice you will have to make: to blow the whistle, or not? However, speaking up, and speaking to other employees, may have the benefit of helping you learn whether the employer is paying you according to the same rules as other employees. It can help you to gather information. And it may just lead the employer to correct the problem! If you have suffered retaliation as a result of objecting to the wage-and-hour practices of your employer, please contact us right away. The law is there to protect you.

7. Contact legal counsel sooner, rather than later. Most claims for unpaid overtime carry a two-year statute of limitations. Therefore, you should contact counsel without delay to determine if you are entitled to unpaid compensation. As time passes, you may be losing your right to back pay.

Dollar bill photo courtesy of photosteve101.

Four Hawaii Farms to Pay $2.4 Million to Workers to Settle EEOC National Origin and Retaliation Employment Discrimination Lawsuit

In a suit filed by the EEOC approximately three years ago against six farms in Hawaii, the EEOC claimed that Thai workers were subjected to conditions comparable to that of human trafficking. As described in the article Four Hawaii Farms to Pay $2.4 Million to Thai Workers to Settle EEOC National Origin and Retaliation Employment Discrimination Lawsuit, between the years 2003 and 2007, Global Horizons contracted Thai workers to work at farms under the H2-A temporary visa program. As part of the program, workers were to be provided food and housing, in addition to pay for the work performed. Not only were the workers required to pay excessive recruitment fees, once on site, they were subjected to denial or delay of pay, confiscated passports, denial of of adequate food and water, unsanitary and overcrowded living conditions, and production quotas that were not required of non-Thai workers. The workers who complained of the discrimination and harassment were retaliated against.

One of the affected Thai workers stated, “We worked and lived under terrible conditions, treated like animals in cage. We were housed in an overcrowded place with a few rooms but many workers, and threatened almost daily. I am grateful that the EEOC is here to help people like me.”

In March of this year, U.S. District Judge Leslie E. Kobayashi ruled that Global Horizons is liable for their continued practice of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation against Thai farm workers based on their national origin and race, in violation of federal anti-discrimination laws.

In addition to the $2.4 million settlement paid by four farms that were named in the suit, injunctive relief will ensure that policies and procedures prohibiting discrimination will be put into place by farms and farm labor contractors.

Regional attorney for the EEOC Los Angeles District, Anna Y. Park, stated, “We all have a responsibility to ensure that the most vulnerable workers are not denied basic human dignity and life-sustaining water and food. Farms and farm labor contractors – and the supervisors that represent them – must ensure workers’ civil rights remain intact, no matter their race or the country they come from.”

If you or someone you know believes they have experienced employment discrimination and/or retaliation, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609.

Middle school students suspended over Facebook post: is this a First Amendment issue?

As a result of a Facebook post about their school’s dress code, a group of Spalding County students are facing suspension. The weekend before the last week of school, a FB post instructing classmates to break dress code through the last week of school escalated into what the principal described as “terroristic threats.” According to a recent post published by WSB-TV 2, the students facing suspension either commented on and/or shared the FB post which initially told students to wear red on Monday and by Thursday escalated to, “Everything they say we can’t wear, wear,” and, “We need the hallways packed and out of control.”

“To me it was just a bunch of 13-year-olds acting crazy,” states the father of one of the suspended students, whose only reply to the post was that she was in. “You should at least contact us first and let us know to be aware of this and that way we could’ve disciplined our own kid instead of ya’ll taking action her.”

Next, the students face a tribunal that will decide if additional disciplinary action will be taken. The First Amendment has been held to protect student speech, especially when it is off-campus speech and does not disrupt campus functions. The question is, will the school district uphold this discipline? And if so, will they violate the students’ constitutional rights?

If you or someone you know believes their 1st Amendment rights have been violated, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609.

Supervisor Threatens to Hang Worker for Drinking from “White People” Fountain

An African American cotton mill worker in Tennessee has alleged discrimination and harassment by his supervisor. In the article Supervisor Threatens to Hang Worker for Drinking From “White People” Fountain, Untonia Harris states that he used his phone to record his supervisor making comments such as, “Black man, don’t go on this white man’s lift,” and in response to Mr. Harris’ attempt to use a water fountain, “I need to put a sign here that says, White people only.” The supervisor then replied to Harris’ inquiry as to what would happen if he were caught using the fountain, “That’s when we hang you.”

Another African American worker at the mill has filed a complaint with the EEOC for similar instances of harassment and discrimination. Marrio Mangrum claims the same supervisor made similar statements to him such as, “You need to think like a white man.”

In the audio, the supervisor is heard expressing support for the Jim Crow era, when racial discrimination and segregation were enforced, “Back then, nobody thought anything about it,” the supervisor says in the audio. “Now, everybody is made to … think it’s bad.”

In response to the supervisor’s alleged behavior, the owner of the cotton mill told CNN, “It’s crazy that anybody would think to talk like that nowadays. It makes no sense whatsoever. You can’t even comprehend it.” Management for the mill is outsourced to Federal Compress. In a statement to CNN, Federal Compress stated, ““Federal Compress very much regrets that the allegations were not reported to it when the first incident is claimed to have occurred,” and has since fired the supervisor in question.

If you or someone you know thinks they have experienced discrimination due to race, the team at Radford & Keebaugh can help. Contact us by phone at (678) 369-3609.