Celine Dion Sued for Overtime Pay, Settles with Former Employees

October 2nd, 2012. By AbiK

Seems the Queen of Love Songs hadn’t been showing the love to two of her former employees. Celine Dion has settled an unpaid overtime lawsuit filed by her former warehouse manager, Keith Sturtevant, and her former front-gate security guard, Raymond Weaver.

To be fair, the lawsuit was filed not only against Ms. Dion, but also against her husband, Rene Angelil and their production company, Feeling Productions, Inc. (Case No. 2:2012cv14236 filed June 27, 2012 in Southern District Court of Florida)

Sturtevant claimed he not only worked at Dion’s warehouse, but also performed various duties at Dion’s house—things like cleaning window shutters on the house, fixing kitchen items and running errands. Sounds like he was a jack-of-all-trades for Ms. Dion as he also apparently set up and tore down party equipment at various events hosted by Dion. According to the lawsuit, Sturtevant was classified as an exempt employee—meaning he would not be eligible for overtime pay; but he performed non-exempt job duties and, therefore the lawsuit argued, he should have been entitled to overtime pay under the FLSA. (Click here for more on exempt vs. non-exempt and what it all means.)

The other plaintiff, Weaver—the security guard—alleged having to take on other duties unrelated to security. These include cleaning Dion’s driveway (it apparently would get berries on it), hosing down patios, cleaning rust off bolts in the swimming pool and lazy river, cleaning tennis courts and, from the sound of it, playing cabana boy should a beach umbrella or two need to be set up—or taken down. Weaver also claimed he was misclassified as exempt.

Well, we won’t know the terms of the settlement, but rather than go to court to duke it out Ms. Dion has settled with Sturtevant and Weaver. And let’s hope both gentleman request detailed job descriptions at their next places of employment…

Update: California Law Protects Facebook Passwords from Employers

September 28th, 2012. By AbiK

Remember that uproar not so long ago about employers asking for social media passwords? The story got a lot of press as job seekers in particular feared being caught between a rock and a hard place if a potential employer were to ask for their Facebook password. A dicey situation at best—and a privacy violation at worst.

Well, now we have some good news: California has signed two new laws relating to social media privacy protection. The first prohibits employers from asking current employees and/or job applicants for social media passwords in an attempt to get insight about the individual via social media snooping.

The second law covers off the same for current and prospective college students and student athletes at universities.

According to a Reuters report (9/27/12), California employers will now be barred from firing or taking disciplinary action against anyone who refuses to give up information related to their social media accounts.

The Reuters article goes on to share this statement from Governor Jerry Brown: “The Golden State is pioneering the social media revolution and these laws will protect all Californians from unwarranted invasions of their personal social media accounts.”

The new California social media password laws go into effect January 1, 2013.

Asbestos News Roundup: 9.27.12 – Second-Hand Asbestos Risk

September 27th, 2012. By LucyC

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.

“Take Home” – or Second Hand Asbestos Exposure

Recently, the medical profession has begun to recognize that people can be affected by asbestos-caused diseases through secondary or passive exposure.

Also known as second-hand asbestos exposure or “take home” asbestos exposure, passive exposure refers to exposure to asbestos fibers that become embedded on a person’s clothing or in their hair—from either another person who has been in direct contact with asbestos or from indirect circumstantial exposure to asbestos.

For example, cases of second-hand asbestos exposure were recently been reported by wives and children of men who worked in the shipyards in World War II. The workers were exposed to large amounts of damaged or “friable” asbestos while on the job, and their wives became came ill following exposure to asbestos fibers that had become lodged in the workers’ clothing. Over the years, the constant inhalation of these fibers resulted in the development of asbestos-related diseases. Case in point, the recently filed asbestos lawsuit concerning Gladys W. Williams, highlighted below.

And there have been asbestos lawsuits filed by children of men who worked around asbestos, and who developed asbestos-related illnesses.

Secondary asbestos exposure is also possible by living in a community or area located near an asbestos mine or a company that manufactures asbestos or products containing asbestos. Many older buildings may also contain asbestos insulation, including schools.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Galveston, TX: Jerry Mapp, son of the recently deceased Sam Billy Mapp, has filed an asbestos lawsuit alleging asbestos-related illness claimed his father’s life. The named defendants in the lawsuit include BP and Pharmacia Corp.

According to the lawsuit, Sam Billy Mapp—who died from cancer on September 23, 2010—worked as an operator from 1947 to 1952, and was exposed to asbestos dust and fibers prior to 1980. The lawsuit claims that the defendants knew, or in the exercise of ordinary or reasonable care should have known, that the asbestos containing insulation and/or machinery they manufactured, sold, designed, supplied, distributed, mined, milled, relabeled, resold, processed, applied or installed was poisonous and highly harmful to the plaintiff’s health.

The lawsuit further claims that the defendants failed to adequately warn Sam Billy Mapp of the dangers associated with the asbestos containing products and/or machinery. Jerry Mapp is seeking unspecified damages. (setexasrecord.com)

St. Clair County, IL: Thirty-three defendants companies have been named in an asbestos lawsuit filed by Lynn Torres, who alleges he developed lung cancer as a result of asbestos exposure on the job.

Torres worked as a welder at Kaiser Aluminum from 1966 until 1975 and at the Carpenters District Council for an unspecified amount of time. The lawsuit contends that the defendants should have known of the harmful effects of asbestos, but failed to exercise reasonable care and caution for the Torres’ safety.

The lawsuit alleges that as a result of his asbestos-related disease, Torres became disabled and disfigured, incurred medical costs and suffered great physical pain and mental anguish. Further, Torres’ became prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment and, as a result, lost large sums of money that would have accrued to him.

Torres is seeking a judgment of more than $50,000, compensatory damages of more than $100,000, punitive and exemplary damages of more than $100,000 and punitive damages in an amount sufficient to prevent the defendants from performing similar conduct in the future, plus other relief the court deems just. (madisonrecord.com)

St. Clair County, IL: James Mahan has filed an asbestos lawsuit naming 48 defendant corporations that, he alleges, caused him to develop lung cancer.

Mahan worked as a submarine maintenance worker from 1954 until 1957, as a nursing assistant at the VA Hospital from 1958 until 1980 and from 1980 until 1983 as a maintenance man for the North Little Rock Housing Authority, according to the lawsuit. It was during this time and through his work that he was exposed to asbestos.

In his complaint, Mahan alleges the defendants should have known of the harmful effects of asbestos, but failed to exercise reasonable care and caution for the plaintiff’s safety, the lawsuit states.

As a result of his asbestos-related disease, Mahan became disabled and disfigured, incurred medical costs and suffered great physical pain and mental anguish, the complaint says. In addition, he became prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment and, as a result, lost large sums of money that would have accrued to him, he claims.

Mahan is seeking a judgment of more than $50,000, compensatory damages of more than $100,000, punitive and exemplary damages of more than $100,000 and punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the defendants, plus other relief the court deems just. (madisonrecord.com)

5 Ways to Get Screwed Buying a Car

September 27th, 2012. By AbiK

Buying a car? Make sure you avoid these car financing traps (scams, really) as you negotiate your car deal and sign the dotted line. The tips here are from the Consumer Federation of America—an association of non-profit consumer organizations that aims to advance the consumer interest through research, advocacy and education.

Car Financing Scams to Avoid

1. Back & Forth Financing

This happens when you’ve actually already signed a loan agreement—and you’ve even driven your new car off the lot. To most, that would signify that you now own the car. But with back and forth financing (aka “yo-yo financing”), the dealer then calls later to inform you that your financing has been denied and you need to return to fill out and sign another contract. Of course, the new contract is based on a higher interest rate or requires a higher down payment. On top of that, the dealer will tell you that either your trade-in has already been sold, or he may threaten to repossess the new car or report it stolen—putting you in between a rock and a hard place.

Make sure any contract you sign is final and binding—no words like “conditional” or “subject to approval” anywhere on it. Also, to avoid the tactic entirely, you may want to seek financing from a bank or credit union—and compare rates with what you would get from the dealership. Just because you’re buying a car from that dealership doesn’t mean you have to accept financing from them.

2. Dealer Kickbacks

A dealer may assure you that his financing will give you the “best terms” possible. However, many times the dealer offer is not the best due to lender kickbacks that the dealership might receive once the loan is closed; or, the dealer’s lender may pad the interest rate—and pass that higher interest rate on to you—in order to make more money.

Again, you do not have to accept financing from the dealership. Rather, shop around for a car loan and get pre-qualified by a bank or credit union. Then, head to the dealer to shop for a new car.

3. Trade-Ins

If you still owe money on your trade-in, the amount you owe may be more than the car is currently worth. And a dealer may add that amount to your new car loan—in effect, your new loan then is actually paying for two cars: you new one and what you still owe on your trade-in. You may or may not be made aware of this when your new loan is discussed.

One red flag to this practice is if the dealer offers you more for your trade-in than it’s worth. It surely sounds like a good deal at first, but car dealers aren’t in the habit of making car buyers financially better off. If your trade-in is worth less than the amount you owe on it, there’s a good chance the dealer is baking that ‘great deal’ into your new car financing—so you’re really not getting such a great deal.

While it’s not always possible, to help avoid being in this situation, try to hold onto any car you own until the amount you owe on it is less than its resale value—ideally, wait until the full loan has been paid off before you consider using it as a trade-in.

4. Dealers’ Failure to Pay-off Existing Loans

If you’re trading in a car in order to buy a new one, the dealer may promise to pay off any outstanding loan balance you have on your trade-in. However, the dealer may not actually pay off the unpaid balance of that loan. That can affect your credit rating (not his!)

Make sure you any paperwork you sign covers the payoff of your trade-in vehicle’s loan. Be sure to then follow up with the lender on that loan to make sure that the loan was actually paid off by the dealer. If not, you should contact an attorney for legal help.

If possible, either keep your current car until the loan on it is paid off, or try to sell the car yourself and use that money to pay the loan off.

Special note on buying a used car: make sure you ask to see the title before you sign the purchase agreement. The dealer cannot take ownership of the title until any pre-existing loan on the vehicle is paid off.

5. Loan Packing

Car loan packing refers to all those “add-ons” that the dealer “packs” on to the car loan all while telling you they are necessary in order for you to get financing. Add-ons would include things like upholstery protection, GAP insurance, theft-etching, rust proofing, extended service contracts or lifetime oil changes.

Make sure you read your contract very carefully and understand all that’s been included as add-ons before you sign on the dotted line.

Lawsuit: Medieval Times Honeymoon Leaves Husband Blind

September 21st, 2012. By AbiK

Medieval Times may not be your #1 honeymoon destination. Oh, there’s courtly love and Chippendale’s-worthy guys—er, knights—riding around on horses and jousting over something or other. Hey, there’s even falconry (whatever that is). But there are also no utensils with which to dine—and horses kicking up dust as you’re trying to dig into the grub. Honey, let’s go there!

That’s exactly what newlyweds Dustin and Melissa Wiseman did last year in Buena Park, CA—and they bought VIP seats. Who knows what prompted them to go except for the fact that there is no Medieval Times in their home state of South Dakota. So maybe there was no one at home to forewarn them about the no-forks thing or to toss a sarcastic “Seriously?” at them upon hearing of their dinner show plans. Regardless, up for a just-married good time, they went.

Should’ve been a terrific show—except Dustin Wiseman wound up going blind in one eye. And now there’s a Medieval Times injury lawsuit. How? Read on.

Over dinner the Wisemans were enjoying the brave—epic!— battle that was unfolding before their eyes. At one point, two jousting knights had at it right in front of their front row seats. The next thing they knew, as titanium swords clashed and sparked before them, some flaming shards went airborne. One of those shards allegedly flew off one of the swords and hit Dustin Wiseman directly in the eye, tearing his cornea and lens and injuring his retina in multiple places.

Needless to say, honeymoon over. The Wisemans wound up at the hospital and Dustin has since had multiple surgeries on his eye. Even with the surgeries, he remains legally blind in one eye.

The lawsuit, Dustin and Melissa Wiseman v. Medieval Times Entertainment, Inc., was filed in Orange County Superior Court (Case No. 00582195) and is seeking damages of over one million dollars. The Wisemans are represented by R. Rex Parris law firm.

Final note: a quick check on the Medieval Times website provides this as an enticement…

“Surrender to an age of bravery and honor and witness epic battles of steel and steed during our ALL-NEW SHOW. From ringside seats, discover a feast of the eyes and appetite with more action, more fun & more excitement than ever before.”

Shouldn’t that be a feast for the eyes?

Sadly, Dustin Wiseman now knows all too well that the evening should’ve been for his eyes, not at the expense of them. Maybe next time a little troubadour action would suffice.