New York Employment Attorneys Blog

Casimir Manyoni Mung'aho, a newly ordained Roman Catholic Priest, was removed from his parish by church officials for secretly fathering a child while in seminary.

Father Mung'aho had been serving as a parochial vicar in the parish of St. Stephen in Warwick, New York. He had come from Tanzania to the United States six years ago to become a priest. He said he wanted to be a role model for people. Indeed, he was liked by his parishioners and the children to which he taught religion.

However, the priest was also later revealed to be a parent. He had fathered a child while he was attending seminary. Although he was still a seminarian when his child was born, and as such had not yet made promises to be celibate, Father Mung'aho was still expected by the church to be celibate.

The archdiocese has not made any final decision on this case yet. Indeed, the removal of Father Mung'aho will allow church officials to address the matter at hand. In the meantime, however, Father Mung'aho has been asked to live independently and reflect on his actions.

Follow the story as it develops here.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2510, et seq., and its subsection, the Stored Communications Act ("SCA"), 18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq., prohibit individuals from accessing, without authorization, stored electronic communications, and provide criminal and civil penalties for unauthorized access to electronic communications and data.

"The purpose of the SCA was, in part to protect privacy interests in personal and proprietary information and to address the growing problem of unauthorized persons deliberately gaining access to, and sometimes tampering with, electronic or wire communications that are not intended to be available to the public." Penrose Computer Marketgroup, Inc. v. Camin.

A person violates the SCA if she accesses an electronic communication service, or obtains an electronic communication while it is still in electronic storage, without authorization. Pure Power Boot Camp v. Warrior Fitness Boot Camp. Thus, employers that own their employees' cell phones, pay the bills and are parties to the cellular service contracts may still violate the SCA where they access employees' personal text messages via the wireless provider, without authorization from the employee.

Wireless providers also risk violating the SCA where they disclose employees' text message content to employers. See Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co. (wireless provider violated SCA by disclosing to employer transcripts of employee's text messages sent to and from employer-issued device).

For violations of the SCA, employees may obtain an award of actual damages and, even without proof of actual damages, statutory damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and punitive damages where the violation was intentional. See Pure Power Boot Camp, Inc. v. Warrior Fitness Boot Camp. (employees were entitled to statutory damages of $1,000 per SCA violation whether or not they suffered actual damages); Pietrylo v. Hillstone Rest. Group. (district court upheld jury's award of back pay and punitive damages based on the jury's finding that defendants' SCA violations were malicious).

Teresa R. Wagner, a former student at the University of Iowa College of Law and a former teacher at the George Mason University School of Law, was refused employment at the University of Iowa College of Law. Ms. Wagner is a conservative Republican activist and believes her political beliefs are the cause for this refusal. Consequently, she has sued the University of Iowa for discrimination based on political motivation.

In December 2011, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit decided that Ms. Wagner's case should go to trial, as there was sufficient evidence suggesting that the University's refusal to employ Ms. Wagner was based on Ms. Wagner's political beliefs. This preliminary victory for the application of First Amendment rights related to political beliefs and association to academic hiring might enable professors who have been discriminated against because of their political beliefs to take action and affirm their rights.

Follow the story as it develops here.

For pharmacists, a rash of new robberies and various killings around the country has made the profession more unsafe than it had been viewed in the past. Some areas have experienced more violence than others, including Long Island where 6 people have been killed recently in pharmacy robberies. As the potential danger for pharmacists grows, many pharmacies have reacted either by not carrying drugs frequently requested by the demographic of people they suspect will attempt to rob their pharmacy, adding additional surveillance or even purchasing guns for protection.

But all of this begs the question: how safe is safe enough for employees under the law? Although that question has not been answered in the context of pharmacists and the recent increase in robbery violence, many employers are taking seemingly necessary precautions in order to protect themselves and their employees. Follow the story as it develops here.

Do you feel your workplace is unsafe? Have you complained to your employer about the unsafe conditions but the situation has not changed? Contact an attorney today.

Dog lover Lynn Jones was fired from her job for trying to save the life of an abused dog. As an employee of Airport Terminal Services in Reno, Nevada, Ms. Jones refused to board the dog into the cargo hold of an airplane, which flight would have almost certainly caused the death of the sick and abused dog. After a prolonged emotional discussion with her boss, Ms. Jones finally succeeded in the argument - airport police called animal welfare and the dog was taken into their custody.

However, the situation caused Ms. Jones her job.

After this story first went public, Ms. Jones was offered her job back. But this saga still begs the question - when is it OK to stand up for the lives of animals? Or even something that you perceive is illegal?

Follow the story as it develops here.

Has your employed instructed you to perform a task that would have resulted in bodily harm or even possibly death to yourself or others? Were you terminated as a result? Contact The Harman Firm to speak with an attorney today.

On Friday, District Judge George B. Daniels of the Southern District of New York ruled that New York City's taxi fleet, as it currently stands, is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The reason? Only 2 percent of the taxi fleet in New York City is currently wheelchair accessible.

The consequences for Mayor Bloomberg are largely financial, and will have an impact on the city's budget until the taxi fleet meets the Americans with Disabilities Act. The city will not only be able to only issue permits for livery cabs with wheelchair accessibility, but will also be inhibited from auctioning more than 400 new yellow cab medallions, which revenue has already been factored in to the 2012 City budget.

Follow the story as it develops here.

Does your place of employment not accommodate your disability? Have you recently been terminated because of a disability? Speak with an attorney today.

Eight states will increase their minimum wage in the new year, including Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. In fact, Washington will be the first state nationally to set its minimum wage above $9/hour.

So, what does this mean for workers who make minimum wage? For workers in states where the minimum wage has increased, it means that workers will make about $583 to $770 more per year, a substantial increase but not enough to push many of these workers and their families over the national poverty line. Although unusual, some cities have also elected to increase their minimum wage standards, including San Francisco who will increase their minimum wage to $10/hour, the highest minimum wage set for a big city in the US.

Federal minimum wage will remain at $7.25, although this recent trend in increasing the minimum wage has the potential to inspire another increase in the federal minimum wage level.

Do you feel you are paid less than minimum wage? Or do you work more than 40 hours per week and still only receive base compensation for overtime hours? Contact an attorney today.

This week, the government released an exhaustive survey related to sexual assault, rape, and domestic violence. It produced staggering statistics, which suggest that sexual assault and rape are more prevalent in our society than previously thought.

Nearly one in five women surveyed had been raped or had experienced an attempted rape. Between 1 and 2 percent of men said they had been raped.

For many women and even some men, these issues stretch into the workplace. On a day to day basis, many individuals are plagued by sexually-charged work environments that they cannot escape, or feel they cannot escape without financially jeopardizing themselves or their families. This happens all too often, and is reported all too frequently.

Do you feel you have been the victim of workplace sexual harassment or assault? Contact The Harman Firm to speak with an attorney today.

Over the past few decades, women have gained substantial ground in advocating their rights in the workplace. Today, most private companies at the very least purport to support equality, although this is not always achieved.

But what about in the military? The Senate last month blocked consideration for an amendment that would have lifted a statutory ban inhibiting women in the military from using healthcare coverage for abortions arising from rape or incest. Currently, women in the military are only allowed to use their healthcare coverage for abortions which imperil their lives.

Politics aside, this consideration being shot down doesn't sound too outrageous. But consider this - women incarcerated in Federal penitentiaries have more rights for abortions than women in the military. Rape victims who are incarcerated received government-funded abortion care. So, why do female inmates appear to have more rights when it comes to abortion coverage from the government than women serving in the military?

Follow the story as it develops.

Do you feel that your company policies are unfair toward women? Are you subject to different standards of treatment than your peers in a similar industry? Contact The Harman Firm today.

Michael Woodford, former CEO of 96 years old japanese Olympus, became one of the world's most famous whistleblowers a few weeks ago after going public with accusations of massive accounting fraud.

Mr. Woodford, a British citizen, was the first non-japanese CEO of Olympus and had been with the company for over 30 years. Within weeks of noticing something was wrong with Olympus' accounting, due mostly to a little-known Japanese magazine, Mr. Woodford vocalized his concerns. The magazine article raised questions about advisory fees of $687 million paid in 2008 for the purchase of Gyrus, a UK medical instruments firm. The article also questioned the $773 million paid for three small Japanese companies. In short, the article alleged a $1.4 billion cover-up and accounting fraud, a figure more than three times Olympus' 2010 profits.

Mr. Woodford began inquiring about the articles' allegations to Olympus' former president, Mr. Kikukawa and to Mr. Kikukawa's right-hand man, Mr. Mori. Mr. Woodford realized something was wrong.

Mr. Woodford blew the whistle on September 23 by writing an eight-page letter of concern, reflecting issues from the magazine story and sent it to Mr. Mori, copying the entire Olympus board. It then escalated into an "e-mail war", according to CNN, which led Mr. Woodford to send various additional letters to Mr. Kikukawa.

Instead of responding to Mr. Woodford's requests, the Board attempted to silence him by giving him the title of chief executive officer, which Kikukawa had held on to previously, effective October 1. Later on, Mr. Woodford informed Olympus' auditing firm Ernst & Young of his financial concerns as well as ordered an independent report from PricewaterhouseCoopers.

A week letter, report in hand, Mr. Woodford sent his final e-mail to the board, attaching the report and asking for the resignation of Mr. Kikukawa and Mr. Mori. Instead, on October 14, the Board of Directors decided to fire Mr. Woodford as CEO.

In large part, because Mr. Woodford blew the whistle on Olympus' financial fraud the company lost 75% of its stock value and is under a December 14 deadline to refile financial statements to the Tokyo Stock Exchange or it will no longer be able to trade.

Mr. Woodford formally retired on November 30 from the position he previously held on the Olympus board.

Are drugs representatives exempt from the provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), that mandates compulsory overtime? That is the question the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to answer on Monday by issuing a writ of certiorari. The Court's decision will put an end to a split between the San Francisco based Ninth Circuit and New York based Second Circuit Court.

The Ninth Circuit ruled in February that Drugs Reps were exempt from the FLSA provision and that they were not entitled to the time and a half overtime pay. The case was brought by two GlaxoSmithKline former Drug Reps on behalf of a nationwide class. The Department of Labor supported the Plaintiffs in this case but according to the Wall Street Journal, the Court ruled that its arguments were "plainly erroneous" and at odds with a common-sense understanding of how the industry functions.

However, this ruling is in direct conflict with a decision from the Second Circuit from last year. In this case, Defendants were Merck & Co and Novartis AG. The Court noted that Drug Reps can't take orders or obtain binding commitments from doctors, and accordingly ruled that they should be paid overtime.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the drug's industry main trade group, immediately reacted, saying in a brief statement that classifying salespeople as eligible for overtime could cost the industry billions of dollars. The statement also added that pharmaceutical companies would have to restructure sales-rep jobs to avoid paying overtime.

The Supreme Court will likely hear arguments in the Spring and specialists expect a decision by July 2012.

Sexual harassment in college and university settings has long been a problem, but only recently has drawn national attention. Two key recent scandals at Pennsylvania State University and Syracuse University are the cause of this new attention, and also growing concern.

It was a shock to hear that, after decades of cited sexual abuse and molestation, the assistant coach of Pennsylvania State University's successful football team was finally indicted and investigated. The investigations, while still ongoing, have revealed shocking patterns of university cover ups. How could that many years of abuse and harassment be brushed under the rug?

However, this type of sexual abuse and harassment is widespread, from single victim cases to ones involved multiple victims. Recently, Syracuse University faced a similar situation with their associate head coach of the men's basketball team, Bernie Fine. Despite abuse dating back to 1884, and various reports made to the administration during that time, Mr. Fine did not suffer any adverse employment actions until his termination last week. The termination arose because a third potential victim came forward and an incriminating voice recording of Mr. Fine's wife speaking to a victim of Mr. Fine's abuse.

Do you feel you have been subjected to sexual abuse or harassment in your university or college setting? Has the administration not dealt with your claim fairly, or at all? Contact The Harman Firm today.

The New York City Council appears ready this week to reinitiate debate over a proposed law, called the Fair Wages for New Yorkers Act, that would establish a minimum wage of $10 per hour with benefits for those employees working on city government subsidized development projects. The City Council's last hearing on this matter was in May. The proposed law would apply only to those companies receiving more than $1 million annually in city subsidies, and also would exempt those businesses generating less than $5 million in revenue a year.

Mayor Bloomberg opposes the proposed measure. He contends that it would lead to job losses as businesses subject to the act, which would boost the current minimum wage up from of $7.25, steered clear of the five boroughs. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who will decide whether the proposal will be voted on, has not taken a position. The proposed Act is widely supported by labor unions.

The Fair Wages for New Yorkers Act also would, if passed, require that employees who do not receive health insurance from their employer receive an additional $1.50 per hour wage supplement to help them purchase their own health insurance

NBA players filed an anti-trust lawsuit in the Northern District of California on Tuesday in an attempt force talks with the team owners. The suit seeks monetary damages for lost wages and an end to an "illegal boycott of the work force."

The N.B.P.A (National Basketball Player's Association) is collaborating in the suit, naming Carmello Anthony and Chauncey Billups (New York Knicks), Kevin Durant (Oklahoma City Thunder), Leon Power (free agent) and Kawhi Leonard (San Antonio Spurs) as lead plaintiffs.

Now that the collective bargaining agreement has fallen apart and the union disbanned, more lawsuits are expected to be filed. One such suit, also filed on Tuesday, is asking for monetary damages and a permanent injunction on behalf of Caron Butler (free agent), Ben Gordon (Detroit Pistons), Anthony Tolliver (Minnesota Timberwolves), and Derrick Williams (Minnesota Timberwolves draft pick). Another suit is expected on behalf of the rookies.

Tuesday coincided with the players' first missed paychecks; which amounted to more than $170 million for the league. David Boise, attorney for the California suit, said that the Commissioner's ultimatum regarding league's proposal last Thursday "turned out to be a mistake." The monetary damages under antitrust law are triple, which may prove to be incentive for owners to head back into negotiations. However, in an interview with ESPN on Monday, NBA Commissioner David Stern said because there is no union, he is unsure with whom they would be negotiating and "we won't be doing anything soon."

MF Global Holdings Ltd., parent of the bankrupt broker-dealer MF Global Inc., is being sued after firing 1,066 employees last week. The suit was brought on behalf of former employees who are seeking 60 days' wages and benefits for allegedly being fired without cause.

The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act requires employees to get 60 days advanced written notice of firing which, according to the filing in Manhattan bankruptcy court, they did not receive.

A spokesperson for Giddens, the trustee appointed to liquidate the broker-dealer, said that Giddens "acted appropriately in connection with the termination of employees as part of the court-mandated liquidation and wind-down of MF Global Inc."

MG Global Holdings, Ltd. filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy on October 31 after bets made on European sovereign debt did not pay off. The same day the Securities Investor Protection Corp sued MF Global Inc. to put it in liquidation (In re MF Global Inc., 11-ap-2790, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York).