Jump To Navigation

Call us now

or use the form below.

Name:


Phone Number:


Email Address:


Comments:

 

Click here to provide more information.

Frequently Asked Questions about Employment Law for the Employee

Q: What laws must employers follow when hiring new employees?

A: A prospective employer must avoid any illegal discrimination based on race, national origin, gender, pregnancy, age, disability or religion during the hiring process. Employers should also be sure to protect the privacy rights of applicants by protecting confidential or private information provided by the applicant and by disclosing to the applicant any background or credit checks that the employer wishes to perform. Employers are required to follow all applicable documentation rules regarding immigration and take care not to discriminate against applicants over 40 because of their age.

Q: Can employers monitor their employees' Internet usage or read their e-mails?

A: The Supreme Court has found that employees have very limited rights to privacy in their employers' computer systems. Employers may monitor Web sites visited by their employees and may block their employees from visiting certain Web sites. Employers can also limit employees' Internet usage to business-related Web sites. If the employer has a company policy that its computer systems are to be used only for work-related activities, it may reprimand or punish an employee who used its equipment for personal purposes. E-mails are considered to be company property if they are sent using the company e-mail system, and many employers monitor or archive all incoming and outgoing e-mails sent through their systems.

Read More

Independent contractors are not treated the same as employees. While independent contractors have more freedom in their work, they also lack some of the protections enjoyed by traditional employees, such as workers' compensation and unemployment benefits. They are also responsible for paying their own taxes directly to the Internal Revenue Service from the first dollar since their taxes are not withheld. If you have a question as to whether you should work as an independent contractor or as an employee, contact an experienced employment law attorney today to discuss your situation.

Pennsylvania and New Jersey Employment Law Attorneys

Since 1980, the law firm of Markowitz & Richman has been representing clients in employment law and labor law matters. Our offices are staffed with experienced, dedicated individuals who understand these types of issues and skillfully work to resolve them as effectively and efficiently as possible. We represent labor unions, benefit funds, and individuals in both state and federal courts and administrative agencies. Trust your case to qualified professionals that understand the many different facets of your case.

For additional information about employment law matters, please feel free to review the content below. Contact our offices with any other questions, concerns, or to schedule a consultation with a member of our knowledgeable legal team.

Employment Law, Employee - An Overview

Employment law covers the relationships between employers and their employees, as well as their potential employees and former employees. Both federal and state laws control various aspects of the employer-employee relationship, and each side's rights and obligations. Because of the complexity of the employment relationship, this area of law involves issues as diverse as discrimination claims and record-keeping, taxation and workplace safety.

There are also different types of employment relationships. Employment relationships can be based on a contract, or they can be "at-will." If the employment relationship is based on a valid contract entered into by the employer and the employee, the terms of that contract will govern the relationship. By contrast, an at-will employment arrangement can be terminated at any time, with or without reason, by either the employer (as long as the reason does not constitute illegal discrimination) or the employee.

With all these factors to consider, it is clear why employment law is such a complex area. If you have an employment law concern, contact an experienced employment law attorney who can provide sound advice and skilled representation in a range of workplace-related matters.

Read More

Independent Contractors

Independent contractors perform compensated work for businesses and individuals, but they are not considered to be employees. This non-employment relationship is based on an oral or written agreement between the business and the independent contractor. This contract may provide specific standards for the work product and establish the pay rate for that work. Businesses that hire independent contractors generally do not withhold federal or state income taxes or Social Security taxes from payments to independent contractors, and they do not maintain unemployment or workers' compensation insurance for those workers. Most independent contractors, therefore, need to make their own quarterly tax payments.

Independent contractors are usually paid by the project, rather than by the hour. Independent contractors have a higher degree of control over the way they work, and they have the ability to contract with a range of businesses. They do not, however, receive many of the legal protections that employees enjoy. If you are a business or a worker involved in or considering an independent contractor arrangement, you should learn the legal consequences. Contact an experienced employment law attorney to discuss your situation.

Read More

Privacy Issues at Work

Technology is a boon to business, but it also raises complicated issues of privacy in the workplace. The vast majority of businesses use computers, and technology has enabled employers to monitor nearly every aspect of workplace communications involving employees' computer and telephone usage. Indeed, many companies take advantage of technology to monitor their employees' use of the Internet and e-mail. When an employee has a reasonable expectation of privacy, however, such as with a physical space like a locked office, the employee may receive privacy protection. Drug testing by an employer, on the other hand, when the testing is reasonable and not a highly offensive intrusion, is usually acceptable. To help you determine what is and is not private in the workplace, contact an employment lawyer to discuss the validity of your company's privacy policies and procedures.

Read More

Unions

Unions exist for the sole purpose of representing the interests of workers, especially in collective bargaining with employers. Collective bargaining is the process of negotiation between the employer and the labor union representatives to determine the key conditions of employment. The result of these efforts is the collective bargaining agreement. This collective bargaining agreement is a contract that is the starting place for resolving conflicts between the employer and its employees. Collective bargaining and union organization is governed by the federal National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). If you are organizing a workplace or engaging in collective bargaining from either side of the table, contact a labor lawyer for experienced counsel on union issues.

Read More

The Hiring Process

Applicants for employment positions have rights whether or not they become employees. Under federal law, it is illegal for an employer to discriminate in its hiring process based on race, national origin, gender, pregnancy, age, disability or religion. State and local laws may specify additional protected classes based on categories such as sexual orientation. Employers must abide by anti-discrimination laws at each stage of the hiring process, from placing the ad to interviewing and the final selection of the candidate. There are few exceptions to these rules, but an employer may discriminate on some bases if a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) exists. A BFOQ can be based on a reasonable and necessary job requirement, but this is a narrow exception. If you are concerned about discrimination in hiring, contact an employment lawyer to discuss your situation.

Read More

Legal News & Case Summaries

News

Labor

Read More

Civil Rights

Read More

Case Summaries

Labor & Employment Law

[06/25] Malone v. Lockheed Martin Corp.
In plaintiff's suit for employment discrimination based on race and retaliation, district court's grant of defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law is affirmed where, for substantially the same reasons as the court indicated below, the record reveals no significant evidentiary basis for the verdict.

[06/25] Pickett v. Sheridan Health Care Ctr.
In plaintiff's Title VII suit against her former employer for being fired in retaliation for her complaints about sexual harassment by residents of defendant's nursing home, district court's denial of defendant's motions for a new trial and remittitur are affirmed where: 1) plaintiff presented enough evidence to persuade a reasonable jury that her complaints caused defendant to fire her; 2) it was not an abuse of discretion to deny the motion for a new trial on the basis of plaintiff's counsel's closing arguments; 3) it was not an abuse of discretion in denying remittitur on the compensatory damages as enough evidence supported a jury award of $25,000, which is well within the $200,000 cap set out in 42 U.S.C. section 1981a(b)(3)(C); and 4) it was not an abuse of discretion in denying remittitur on the punitive damage award and the logic of Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, 128 S. Ct. 2605 (2008) does not apply to this Title VII case.

Read More

ERISA

[06/24] Edwards v. A.H. Cornell & Son, Inc.
In plaintiff's suit against her employers and supervisors, claiming that she was terminated in violation of section 510 of ERISA and state common law after complaining to management about alleged ERISA violations, district court's grant of defendants' motion to dismiss is affirmed as unsolicited internal complaints are not protected activities under the anti-retaliation provision of section 510 of ERISA.

[06/24] Durakovic v. Bldg. Serv. 32 BJ Pension Fund
In an ERISA challenge to a union disability-benefits denial, dismissal of the complaint is reversed where: 1) a fund organized pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 186(c)(5) is conflicted within the meaning of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Glenn, 128 S. Ct. 2343 (2008); 2) the district court should have accorded the conflict in this case more weight; and 3) no rational trier of fact could have failed to conclude that the benefits denial was arbitrary and capricious.

Read More

Workers' Comp

[06/24] Bifulco v. Patient Bus. & Fin. Serv., Inc.
In plaintiff's wrongful termination suit against her former employer, Fifth District's reversal of trial court's grant of defendant's motion for summary judgment is affirmed as workers' compensation retaliation claims brought against the state under section 440.205 are not subject to the presuit notice requirements of section 768.28(6)

[06/22] Hawaii Stevedores, Inc. v. Ogawa
In a petition for review of a decision of the Benefits Review Board (BRB) affirming an Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) grant of disability benefits under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, the petition is granted in part where: 1) the mere fact that an expert witness talked with a party's lawyer and then altered his or her opinion language, though it might be considered relevant, did not require a factfinder to find that expert witness was other than credible; and 2) the ALJ's finding of the maximum medical improvement date was not supported by substantial evidence. However, the petition is denied in part where: 1) the ALJ's finding that petitioner did not meet its burden of demonstrating prejudice was supported by substantial evidence, and respondent's late notice was properly excused; and 2) respondent's stroke qualified as a compensable injury under the Longshore Act.

Read More

Civil Rights

[06/25] Malone v. Lockheed Martin Corp.
In plaintiff's suit for employment discrimination based on race and retaliation, district court's grant of defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law is affirmed where, for substantially the same reasons as the court indicated below, the record reveals no significant evidentiary basis for the verdict.

[06/25] Ruiz v. Cty. of Rockland
In an action against a county for national origin and race discrimination under Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the district court erred in finding that plaintiff was not qualified for his position based on evidence of plaintiff's misconduct; but 2) plaintiff failed to raise an inference of discrimination.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.