The world of employment law is ever changing and keeping up with precedent setting cases can be challenging which is precisely why Tayeb Hyderally chose this area of practice. There are many different facets that must be addressed such as wages, family medical leave, discrimination and dealing with disabilities in the workplace. Ty Hyderally shares his expertise with many different audiences. He works diligently to inform employees and employers of the latest employment law cases so that they can work to maintain a safe environment for everyone at the workplace. Hyderally speaks to various organizations as well as corporate level personnel to help develop policies and procedures which provide protection for employees. The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) was written to ensure that employees were being paid for the work they perform. There are many FLSA cases filed in the US every year. In this case the employer was not held liable because the employees omitted important information. Continue Reading
Discrimination can take many forms in the workplace. Ty Hyderally is an expert in employment lawwho is dedicated to educating employees and employers of both their rights and responsibilities regarding employment law in the workplace. Some cases are instances where there are subtle but continuous harassment or discriminatory activities; other times cases involve blatant acts of discrimination. Tayeb Hyderally represents clients who have been discriminated against in the workplace in any way. In this age discrimination case, there were behind the scenes activities that the worker was unaware of. However, when these came to light, she was able to receive retribution for the inappropriate actions of the company.
Debra Moreno – A very Efficient Worker
Debra Moreno’s manager seemed to always speak highly of her work ethic and referred to her as a very “thorough and efficient” worker. However, the owner of the company stated that she thought Ms. Moreno sounded “old” on the phone and that she also looked like a “bag of bones.” Carolyn Frutoz-De Harne, owner of the company, allegedly told another manager that Ms. Moreno was not the “type” of worker that she preferred to represent Hawaii Healthcare Professionals, Inc. which is a home health care provider for senior citizens.
Upon completing a thorough investigation, the EEOC filed a law suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii and named Ms. Frutoz-De Harne as the defendant. The EEOC did see the conduct as a form of age discrimination. The courts found that this was indeed a case of age discrimination and Debra Moreno was awarded over $190,000. In addition to gaining this monetary award, part of the judgment included that the defendant in the case develop and disseminate procedures which will prevent future cases of age discrimination. The company must provide adequate and appropriate training to all its personnel. This includes training all staff members concerning age discrimination as well as retaliation. Supervisors were also to be trained regarding how to handle these types of complaints. Hawaii Healthcare Professionals were also required to work closely with EEOC coordinators to work through these materials as well as posting notices for current employees about the judgment. The EEOC will continue to monitor the company to ensure that they remain in compliance with the judgment.
Examining the of the Case of Age Discrimination
The regional attorney for the EEOC, Anna Y. Park is in charge of overseeing the litigation for the agency in Hawaii stated that “age should never be a factor when evaluating an employee or job applicant’s worth.” What makes this employment law case so interesting is that the worker’s abilities were completely disregarded and she was terminated solely for her age. The EEOC works to ensure that this type of violation does not occur in the workplace. Employers are responsible to have strong anti-discrimination policies in place and to offer adequate training for personnel to prevent age discrimination from occurring in the workplace. The EEOC is organization which enforces the federal employment laws which prohibit discrimination.
Expert lawyers are often called upon to represent victims who have been subjected to sexual harassment in the workplace. To make matters worse there are many cases in which the victim also suffers retaliatory actions simply for reporting the incident. Tayeb Hyderally is an employment law expert who has many years of successful litigation in cases involving employment law including sexual harassment and retaliation for reporting.
It is imperative that companies have a solid plan of action in place for instances in which these types of allegations are made. Attorney Ty Hyderally offers companies his expertise on the matter and can help them develop appropriate policies which can protect both employees and employers in these types of instances. Companies which do not have policies in place can have a very complicated situation on their hands which could have been avoided if policies had been created to intervene.
Recently one such case involving both sexual harassment and retaliation for reporting reached a settlement. Three women were employed by Holiday Inn Express located in Simpsonville, South Carolina. They alleged that one of the general managers had sexually harassed all three women. The harassment included inappropriate sexual remarks, unsolicited and unwanted advances and improper touching. This had created a hostile work environment for the women. One of the women filed a complaint with the hotel chain but they failed to take proper steps in responding in a timely manner to the complaints. The company neither investigated nor tried to put an end to the ongoing harassment.
After the woman complained about the sexual harassment, she was terminated. The firing was done by the general manager who was the subject of the harassment allegations. The EEOC maintained that this termination was retaliatory in nature. The EEOC also brought suit against two more companies who are responsible for managing and operating the hotel. These two companies settled with the EEOC and as part of the settlement the companies must make a monetary payment of $90,000 to the victims which will split the money amongst themselves. The companies are also agreeable to taking appropriate steps so that sexual harassment will be prevented in the workplace. As part of the agreement the companies must redistribute their policies on sexual harassment and require annual training on sexual harassment as well as retaliatory actions. All of the hotel’s managers, employees and supervisors must attend this training each year. The companies also have to report any further complaints or allegations of sexual harassment directly to the EEOC.
Sadly enough these types of cases happen frequently. Companies are forced to comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which declares that retaliation for reporting an incident is unlawful. Tayeb Hyderally prepares for speaking engagements in which he informs companies and employees how these types of situations can be completely avoided. He also shares his legal expertise to inform them of how to prepare policies that will protect company officials and employees in such cases. Companies should not only have policies regarding sexual harassment in place but also ensure that these policies are easily available to employees at any time.
The legal world is vast, especially when one begins to study employment law and sexual harassment. Ty Hyderally is an experienced lawyer who has been intrigued with the complexity of this legal area. Actually, this complex world is what first made it appealing to him. He has been successfully litigating cases of employment law and various forms of discrimination for many years. He also has offices in both the New York and New Jersey areas.
There are both state and federal laws which are created to protect employees against sexual harassment in the workplace. Federal laws are centered on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These laws apply to employers who employ 15 or more persons. Most of the time employees who work for smaller businesses are still covered by state level anti-discrimination laws. While state laws may vary some on issues of same sex harassment, federal law supports claims against an employer for same sex harassment.
There are two types of sexual harassment as it occurs in the workplace. Quid Pro Quo Harassment is where an employee is required to tolerate some level of sexual harassment so that they can keep their job, obtain benefits, raises or promotions. And a Hostile Work Environment Harassment is a situation in which the harassment interferes with the work performance of an employee, or creates an offensive or abusive work environment.
One incident could be considered a quid pro quo harassment claim, but usually to establish a hostile work environment there will be a pattern of abusive conduct. There are several types of behaviors that can be classified as sexual harassment. Any time there are unwelcome sexual advances, verbal or physical contact of a sexual nature or requests for sexual favors it can constitute a sexual harassment claim. There are certain situations where an employer can be held liable for misconduct of non-employees, if they do not take any form of appropriate or corrective action to detour the behavior.
To bring a claim for sexual harassment the plaintiff will have to establish that they found the conduct to be offensive, abusive or hostile. To file a complaint against a workplace for sexual harassment does not mean that one has to be a victim. Usually prior to filing a suit in a sexual harassment case, the complainant will have to file a complaint with the employer or their administrative agency. To file a federal complaint, it will have to be filed with the EEOC first. And there are local and state agencies to which persons can file complaints.
Title VII will also provide protection for employees who file a sexual harassment case, who are testifying in these types of proceedings, or are participating in an investigation or litigation that is associated with a sexual harassment complaint. An employee may lose a sexual harassment claim, but still win against the employer on the grounds of retaliation.
There has been much progress in trying to alleviate discrimination in the workplace. Discrimination law has been through many changes over the past 40 years. In 1964 the Civil Rights Act was enacted to protect workers from discrimination based on race, religion, national origin or gender. In 1967 Congress then adapted the law to also prohibit discrimination based on age. And in 1990, Congress once again made changes to discrimination law which also makes it illegal to discriminate against an individual based on a disability. Many states have followed suit and also prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Many of the worst discriminatory practices were alleviated by the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Resistance to enforcement of the laws is what makes it so difficult to eliminate in the workplace. Political resistance to any form of remedial action has made this a very difficult task to undertake and to succeed. Businesses have become much craftier in their employment schemes which make it even more difficult to detect and even harder to correct. Thus the workplace continues to practice unjust and illegal discriminatory practices. Despite the government’s best attempts to eradicate discrimination in the workplace it sadly still exists.
Only about 2% of cases heard on discrimination are won by the plaintiff, the worker who feels they were discriminated against. However, unfair treatment must not be confused with illegal discrimination. Treating an individual differently than others is in violation of discrimination law when the ill treatment is based on the existence of a characteristic which is protected. Actions by a company based on job performance or even something as subjective as personality do not necessarily indicate discriminatory practices.
When it is proven that a company has been engaged in such illegal actions they can be made to pay up to $300,000 in punitive damages. The person who was dealt with unfairly based on one of the protected groups can receive back pay or reinstatement of their previous position or their job if they were fired. They can be compensated for any pain and suffering that was due to the illegal practices of the business.
The Federal law carries a statute of limitations for most forms of discrimination in the workplace. The complaint must be filed within 180 days of the alleged occurrence. The exception occurs for sexual discrimination. Claims for these cases must be filed within 90 days of receiving the “right to sue” letter from the EEO certifying the individual’s right to file a claim for sexual discrimination.