Atlanta Employment Lawyer Blog

A recent racial harassment case argued before the U.S. Supreme Court, Vance v. Ball State University, raises a significant question, “Who is a supervisor?” Determining whether a someone at work is a supervisor or not has serious consequences in terms of liability. In many instances, if a co-worker is also considered “a supervisor,” then an employer may be held “vicariously liable” for the actions of the supervisor and be required to pay compensation as a result of the harassing behavior.

Vance v. Ball involves the Title VII racial discrimination claim of Maetta Vance. Vance, a black catering assistant at Ball State University, alleged that her white co-workers and supervisors racially harassed her. Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against their employees "because of" their race or color. That means that employers may not take your race or color, or your perceived race or color, into consideration in making employment decisions.

If you have been subjected to race or color discrimination, consulting with an Atlanta employment discrimination attorney is important to answer your race discrimination questions and determine your next steps. Where discrimination is found to have occurred, you may be entitled to compensation including front and back pay, emotional distress and other compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys' fees.

Continue reading " Who Is A Supervisor? Supreme Court Seeks Guidance In Race Harrassment Case " »

A recent case out of Michigan has determined that a man may proceed to trial on the question of whether he was entitled to leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to help his sister to decide whether to take their mother off of life support.

The FMLA is a federal employment law that provides that eligible employees may take up to 12 weeks unpaid leave from their jobs each year under certain circumstances including caring for your own serious health condition, the birth or care of a newborn or adopted child and caring for family members who have a serious illness. It may be possible to bring a lawsuit if an employer interferes with your right to take leave or retaliates against you for taking leave. If you have questions concerning whether you are eligible to take leave, or believe your employer is taking negative actions against you for taking leave, it is important to consult with an experienced Georgia employment discrimination attorney to discuss your next steps and answer your family and medical leave questions.

In Romans v. Michigan Dep’t of Human Servs., a fire and safety officer, Jerry Romans, requested leave to make the decision whether to keep his mother on life support. Romans intended to go to the hospital immediately following his shift but was told he couldn’t leave because a co-worker called in sick. Although Romans found a volunteer to cover for him, he was not allowed to leave. In spite of the leave denial, Romans went to the hospital to help his sister make care-related decisions. At the hospital, Romans grew concerned about losing his job and immediately went back.

Continue reading " When Am I Entitled To Take Leave Under The FMLA? " »

A recent case upheld a $417,955 jury verdict award in a sex discrimination retaliation case. In Lore v. Syracuse, a female police officer - Therese Lore - filed a sex discrimination case claim after she had replaced in her position as a Public Information Officer with the City of Syracuse.

Federal law provides that a sex discrimination claim may be filed where you have been discriminated against “because of” your gender. This means your gender must not play a role in any employment action decision including hiring, firing, promotions, transfers, pay and disciplinary actions. Additionally, in order to protect those who have been discriminated against and to promote fairness in the work place, federal law also prohibits retaliation by employers against employees who file discrimination complaints. If you have questions concerning employment discrimination or gender discrimination, an experienced Georgia discrimination lawyer can help provide valuable answers and counsel you concerning your next steps.

Here, the police chief told Lore she was transferred because “women should be seen and not heard” and that she had too much influence. She was placed in a less desirable job. After filing a grievance she was assigned to a new post, but then continued to receive fewer assignments than other sergeants in the division, and received less overtime pay. Lore subsequently filed a discrimination complaint as well as a claim for retaliation.

Continue reading " Female Police Officer Retaliation Award Upheld " »

Recently, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that an Atlanta district court made three crucial errors when it rejected an HIV-positive claim of disability discrimination against the Atlanta police department.

In Roe v. Atlanta, Richard Roe sued the city for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) after he was rejected as a police officer candidate. The ADA prohibits disability discrimination in several ways, including banning discrimination against qualified individuals with a disability in the terms and conditions of employment such as hiring, firing and promoting.

Here the Appellate Court found that Roe could maintain his claim against the city for several reasons. First, the 11th Circuit court found that the lower court too quickly assumed that Roe would not be able to refute the city’s claim that he wasn’t hired because he would pose a direct threat to others. Discovery responses provided in the case showed that the department didn’t consider HIV to be a “medically disqualifying condition” and that the city didn’t have a policy against hiring people who tested HIV-positive. As a result, Roe was lulled into believing that he didn’t have to show his condition wasn’t serious. Additionally, the court didn’t look into whether the city violated the ADA by having Roe submit to a medical examination before extended him a conditional job offer. Because of these errors, the appellate court determined that Roe could move forward with his claim of discrimination against the police department.

This case is important because it shows that in some cases an employer’s own policy handbook or lack of a policy can support claims of discrimination.

Continue reading " Atlanta HIV Discrimination Case Moves Forward " »