Author Archive

8 Things an Exempt Job Status Deprives you of…

October 15th, 2013. By AbiK

A lot of questions we receive here at LawyersandSettlements.com have to do with employment…things like what counts as on-the-job harassment, whether or not someone is owed overtime pay, and questions about wrongful termination. One of the trickiest areas of employment though has to do with misclassification—i.e., whether someone’s position is considered exempt or non-exempt. We discuss misclassification in greater detail on our Unpaid Overtime-Employment info hub on our website. But beyond what most people consider to be the difference between exempt and non-exempt—that exempt jobs don’t qualify for overtime pay while non-exempt ones do—there are other things you should be aware of if you’ve recently been switched over or promoted into an exempt position.

Exempt positions tend to be ones that pay a salary rather than an hourly rate. For many, the chance for what could be a higher rate of pay and no longer “working on the clock” makes pursuing exempt positions worth the trip. Here though are eight protections that an exempt job status deprives employees of—provided by the State of California Department of Industrial Relations (you can find this info at your own state’s department of labor).

8 Things an Exempt Job Status Deprives you of Protection for…

overtime premium;
minimum wage;
reporting time pay;
requirement of records under the IWC Orders (but not records required by the Labor Code);
requirement that employer furnish uniforms and equipment (except, of course, that any expenditure by an employee is recoverable under CA Labor Code Section 2802).
requirement that meals and lodging amounts be limited;
meal period requirement;
rest period requirement;

Tags: Employment, Labor Law, Unpaid Overtime, Wage and Hour
Posted in Emerging Issues, Employment | No Comments »

Asbestos News Roundup: 9.19.13 – Electrician Asbestos Risk

September 23rd, 2013. By AbiK

A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.

Electricians, Boiler and Furnace Technicians Asbestos Disease Risk

Electricians and electrical cable installers may not know it, but they are at risk for being exposed to asbestos through repair, demolition or installation work. This lethal, fibrous material was used in felted asbestos insulation or asbestos tape to insulate wiring. So working on old power lines, old wiring or breaker boxes would put electricians at risk for asbestos exposure. Older arc chutes also contain asbestos. It was used in circuit breakers, for example, before the mid-1980′s, when they were made of asbestos-containing plastic molding compound.

Boiler technicians, sadly, are also at risk from materials in the workplace. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), insulation blankets (the outside covering or shell), door gaskets, duct insulation, and tape at duct connections of furnaces and boilers can all contain asbestos. Technicians who worked on repairing boilers and furnaces in the past would have been at risk for asbestos exposure.

Asbestos was used between 1930 and 1972 as high-temperature insulation for oil, coal, or wood furnaces, generally found in older homes. Steam and hot water pipes were insulated with asbestos-containing material, particularly at elbows, tees, and valves. Pipes may also be wrapped in an asbestos “blanket”, or asbestos paper (which looks very much like corrugated cardboard). Asbestos-containing insulation has also been used on and inside round and rectangular furnace ducts. Sometimes the duct itself may be made of asbestos-containing materials.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Charleston, WV: 37 companies are being sued by the daughter of recently deceased Clinton Pitzer, who was diagnosed with asbestos-related lung cancer on February 25, and subsequently died on March 5.

In her lawsuit, Tammy Timmons, alleges her father was exposed to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing products from 1954 until 1995 while employed as a coal miner, a manager/operator of a coal mine and a laborer.

Timmons is suing the defendants based on theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentation and post-sale duty to warn.

Certain defendants are also being sued as premises owners and as Pitzer’s employers for deliberate intent/intentional tort.

The 37 defendants in the suit include: Caterpillar Inc.; Crane Co.; Dravo Corporation; Eaton Electrical Inc.; Fairmont Supply Company; FMC Corporation; Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation; Genuine Parts Company; Goulds Pumps Inc.; and Grinnell Corporation. (wvrecord.com)

New Orleans, LA: George Joseph Van Houten has filed an asbestos lawsuit alleging his former employers failed to take proper safety precautions to reduce or eliminate his risk for asbestos exposure. Van Houten has, as a result of his asbestos exposure, developed malignant asbestos mesothelioma.

Van Houten alleges in his lawsuit that he was exposed to injurious levels of asbestos while working at Avondale Shipyards from 1964-1969. During this period, he alleges, he used and handled and/or was in the vicinity of others using or handling asbestos or asbestos-containing products at these facilities in ship engine rooms and where fibers in the ambient air could be breathed in. He was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in March of 2013.

One of the defendants, Avondale Inc, is accused of “negligently, recklessly, willfully and/or because of gross and wanton negligence, fault, or strict liability, fail[ing] to properly discharge its duties to the Plaintiff in failing to provide a safe workplace.” Specifically, the company allegedly neglected to provide safety instructions for eliminating or reducing risks of exposure to products that contained fibrous, incombustible, chemical-resistant substances, failed to provide adequate measures to control the level of infiltration into the ambient air and to the plaintiff’s home, and failure to deliver medical monitoring and air monitoring. Avondale also allegedly failed to inspect products, to test for defects or hazards, to accurately report the results of those tests and medical studies; and further, allegedly failed to design the products without asbestos where alternate and equally suitable products were available, in addition to improperly packaging, transporting, handling, storing, and disposing of the product.

Van Houten is seeking an undisclosed amount for all medical costs and expenses, lost earnings, mental suffering, anguish, physical pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of quality of life and all other forms of relief deemed appropriate.

The defendants in the lawsuit include: Avondale Industries Inc., Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, Armstrong International, Asbestos Corporation, Aurora Pump Company, Inc., Buffalo Forger, Inc., BW/IP, Inc., CBS Corporation, Cleaver, Brooks, Inc., Cooper US, Copes-Vulcan, Inc., Crane Company, Crosby Valve, Inc., CSR, Inc., Eagle, Inc., Eaton Corporation, Inc., The Fairbanks Company, Inc., FMC Corporation, Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Goulds Pumps Inc., Hopeman Brothers Inc. IMP Industries Inc., Ingersoll-Rand Company, International Paper Company, John Crane Inc., Joy Technologies Inc., McCarty Corporation, Mine Safety Appliances Company, The Nash Engineering Company, Owens Illinois Inc. Reilly-Benton Company, Inc., Schneider Electric USA Inc., SpiraxSarco, Inc., Sterling Fluid Systems (USA) LLC., Taylor-Seidenbach Inc., Trane US Inc., Union Carbide Corporation, Uniroyal Inc., Velan Valve Corporation, Warren Pumps LLC, The Wm. Powell Company, American Employers, American Insurance Company, Home Insurance Company, OneBeacon Insurance Company, the Stonewall Insurance Company and executives with Avondale/Huntington Inglass/Northrop Gunman Ship Systems. (louisianarecord.com)

New Orleans, LA: Mr. Ora Ham, a former shipyard welder who was recently diagnosed with asbestos-related disease, has filed an asbestos suit against Eagle Inc., Reilly-Benton Company Inc., Taylor-Seidenback Inc. and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company in the Orleans Parish Civil District Court.

Ham alleges he was exposed to asbestos and asbestos-containing products while working as an insulator and welder from approximately 1963-1979 at several shipyards and drilling companies in Louisiana and Texas.

The lawsuit contends that the defendants allowed dangerous asbestos fibers to escape from their custody, control, and guard by designing, evaluating, manufacturing, packaging, furnishing, storing, handling, transporting, installing, distributing, selling and/or supplying asbestos-containing products to Ham’s job sites.

In his lawsuit, Ham alleges the defendants are strictly liable for manufacturing and selling defective products and for systematic negligence by failing to properly test their products, warn against the dangers inherent in their use, provide proper instructional material and safety devices to reduce the dangers of those products especially when other similar, non-asbestos-containing products would have served as high heat insulation.

Ham also claims the defendants “knew that their products would have to be cut, sawed, broken, sprayed, hammered into place and generally handled in such a manner as to created dust which when ingested or inhaled into the body would cause severe and disabling diseases.”

Ham is seeking an undisclosed amount for physical pain and suffering, mental pain and anguish, loss of enjoyment of life and medical expenses.

The companies named in the suit as job sites include: Gulfport Shipyard, Wards Drilling Company, Livingston Shipyard, Texaco, Chevron, Mobil, Motiva, LeBlanc Welding, Lee Towing Company, Action Construction, H. B. Zachary, International Maintenance Company, Inland Marine and Diamond Offshore Drilling. (louisianarecord.com)

Posted in Asbestos Mesothelioma | 1 Comment »

White Guy Nets $3.25M Verdict in Racial Discrimination Case

August 16th, 2013. By AbiK

Racial discrimination is something we’ve come to associate with minority groups—it’s rare that you see an item in the press about a non-minority being the victim of such discrimination, outside of say the occasional affirmative action case related to college admissions.

But, what if someone from the majority is actually part of the minority in a work situation? That’s what happened in a recent court case involving the city of Los Angeles.

In James Duffy v. City of Los Angeles, Duffy, a 63-year old Caucasian man who’d been working for the City’s Department of Recreation and Parks as a gardener for 19 years, alleged racial discrimination against his Hispanic foreman and coworkers. According to court documents, Duffy’s foreman, Abel Perez, allegedly began discriminating against Duffy upon becoming his foreman back in 2004.

Duffy claimed he was forced to retire after several discriminatory events took place—including some harassing incidents that happened after Duffy had suffered an on-the-job head injury, resulting in short-term memory problems. According to the filing, Duffy stated he’d complained to his supervisors several times but to no avail.

Some of the alleged discriminatory actions included Perez once stating “I hate white people.” Perez would also allegedly tell Duffy he hadn’t been given certain assignments when he had or that he failed to complete assignments he had never actually been given.

The complaint also stated the city of Los Angeles engaged in intentional racial discrimination by maintaining a “systematic and continuous policy and goal of firing and demoting Caucasian employees”—and that the city took no action after Duffy had made numerous complaints about the harassment he was enduring.

The case, James Duffy v. City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles Superior Court, Central , BC454369, went before a jury and a verdict was returned in favor of Duffy. The $3,255,000 verdict was unanimous on claims of disability and racial harassment, retaliation and discrimination by the City of Los Angeles and three of Duffy’s supervisors. The verdict comprised $380,000 in economic damages and $2,875,000 in non-economic damages.

Tags: Abel Perez, City of Los Angeles, Disability Discrimination, James Duffy, racial discrimination
Posted in Discrimination, lawsuits, Settlement | 16 Comments »

Ms. ‘Lean In’ Sheryl Sandberg Called ‘Exploitive’ over Unpaid Intern Job

August 14th, 2013. By AbiK

Say it isn’t so! You have to love social media—where everything you (or your hired minions) say can, and will, be held against you. Enter Sheryl Sandberg, author of the much-talked-about “Lean In” book and COO of Facebook. Ms. Sandberg, herself, did not apparently say anything on Twitter, but one of her minions, Jessica Bennett—who ‘heads up editorial’ for Ms. Sandberg’s Lean In team (whatever that really means) did tweet something about an available gig as an unpaid intern on the Lean In team.

That was on Tuesday. Today, according to a post over at Gawker, there had also been a post by Bennett on Facebook that offered up the gig.

Ordinarily, it might sound like a great opportunity. But, given how much Ms. Sandberg is probably reaping financially from both Facebook and her book sales, why is the job “unpaid”? And isn’t it a bit at odds with the whole Lean In female empowerment thing? Take risks! Sit at the table! Seek challenges! But, by the way, if you’re goal is to sit at MY table, don’t expect to receive a dime from me.

Not to mention, last we looked, an intern is supposed to be learning something on the job—this job description sounds like the Lean In team is looking for more of a seasoned pro. Here are the requirements for the unpaid intern:

“Part-time, unpaid, must be HIGHLY organized with editorial and social chops and able to commit to a regular schedule through end of year. Design and web skills a plus!”

You have to love the chutzpah there. Note to Ms. Bennett: Merriam-Webster defines “chops” as “expertise in a particular field or activity”. Hmm. That would seem to be at odds with the requirements of an unpaid intern who would typically come to a company in order to be trained on-the-job.

Oh, but it’s all for the prestige of getting dumped on to promote Leaning In!

For kicks, here’s the image of Bennett’s Twitter post that appeared over at Gawker (note the comments):

Here’s some advice for Ms. Sandberg and her Lean In team: practice what you preach…walk the talk (ugh, hate that saying but the shoe fits) and pay your damn interns. Otherwise, maybe you should refund everyone who bought your book; after all, it’s starting to sound a bit like consumer fraud…

Tags: Employment, Lean In, Sheryl Sandberg, unpaid interns, Wage and Hour
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues | 1 Comment »

BofA Customer Service Finally Proves it’s Run by Morons

July 11th, 2013. By AbiK

(Image: Twitter/@darthmarkh)

You gotta love Bank of America. On the heels of reports of debt collection harassment—and the recent Bank of America debt collection harassment class action lawsuit that was filed—BofA managed to not only inspire ire in its customers but also make a complete fool out of itself! How did it manage that, you ask? Read on…

In the age of social media-enhanced customer service (ie, have a problem with a company? Tweet it and await your response…), Bank of America is right up there with the best of them responding to customer mentions (#BofA, @BofA, etc…) of the big bank on Twitter. Well, as Gizmodo reported earlier in the week, sometimes too much monitoring for company mentions—along with what looked like either cookie-cutter automated responses or more likely complete incompetence—can make a customer service department look like a bunch of idiots. And, indeed, BofA’s customer service looked that way.

Here’s the low-down: A guy (Twitter handle=@darthmarkh) tweeted that he’d been creating some chalk art on the sidewalk out in front of a BofA location in NYC—and, might I add, he’d done a damn good job recreating the Monopoly game “go to jail” graphic (see pic above). Needless to say, the cops finally told him to stop and move along. He did, and he then tweeted about the incident with the mention of “@bankofamerica”—but his goal was to spread word of BofA’s alleged “illegal foreclosure fraud” rather than to have BofA take notice and ask if he’d like assistance.

Well, the clueless wonders over at BofA customer service reached out to @darthmarkh to find out if there was “anything they could do to help?” Seriously. (See the twitter conversation here). And, it went on to include gems like “We are here to help, listen, and learn from our customers and are glad to assist with any account related inquiries.”

And we’re so glad you are! Can you imagine the level of incompetence it takes to either respond—in person—like that, or to build an automated-response system that would generate such responses regardless of the nature of inquiry it was responding to? #EpicFail doesn’t even do this one justice.

The field day that @darthmarkh’s followers had after that was, as you can imagine, hilarious. And it should be mentioned that as of today, there hasn’t been an official response from BofA or acknowledgment of the screw-up—guess it’s better to stay mum and hope it all just creeps off everyone’s Twitter pages.

Sadly, doesn’t look like BofA has done much since the rallying cry for better customer service from CEO Brian Moynihan back in January of this year. Now, instead of looking like they’re listening to customers and ‘making it easier for customers to do business with the bank’, you have to wonder if anyone at all is actually listening—and, if they are, if they even have a brain.

Tags: #EpicFail, Bank of America, BoFA, BofA class action lawsuit, BofA Customer Service, debt collection harassment, foreclosure fraud
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues | 7 Comments »