Beranbaum Menken LLP Blog

Disability Discrimination Suit Filed on Behalf of Plaintiff Suffering From Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

BMBB Law — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 14:21:10 +0000

On September 8, 2011, Beranbaum Menken filed a disability discrimination suit alleging that Graham Windham, a New York-based foster care placement agency, discriminated against one of its employees because she suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. The employee had performed outstanding work for the agency for years, overseeing the successful placement of countless children in foster homes throughout the city and earning accolades from the city of New York and Graham Windham itself. However, the complaint alleges that once her disability was discovered, her employer no longer believed that she was capable of performing her job, resulting in severe harassment, culminating in her termination. Under federal and local laws, such stereotyped assumptions about people with disabilities cannot legally form the basis for adverse employment actions. The suit therefore seeks compensation for violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act, as well as state and local human rights laws.

Class Action Certified in Prevailing Wage Suit

BMBB Law — Fri, 09 Sep 2011 20:54:54 +0000

The New York Labor Law requires that employees working for a contractor on a public project be paid “prevailing wages,” which are based on the union rate for that work and are generally higher than the typical wage. Beranbaum Menken has filed several lawsuits against companies who break this law by paying their employees less than the prevailing wage rate. In one of these cases, Judge Steven Gold of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has issued a decision certifying the case as a class action. Judge Gold decided that the case could proceed on behalf of all employees of SimplexGrinnell who worked on fire alarm and sprinkler systems on public projects in the State of New York. The judge also decided that the recent Supreme Court decision in Dukes v. Wal-Mart, which many saw as restricting employee class actions, was no impediment to a class action here. This case is titled Ramos v. SimplexGrinnell LP., 07CV981(SMG). No trial date has been set as of yet.

If you worked on public projects, be they for the state, a municipality, or a public school, and think you were not paid the “prevailing wage,” call or email our firm.

Collective Age Discrimination Suit Filed Against Mainfreight, Inc.

BMBB Law — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:51:48 +0000

On Tuesday, June 14^th, Beranbaum Menken filed a collective action suit against Mainfreight, Inc. alleging that the company violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act by terminating and failing to promote employees over 40 years old. We are seeking to represent all such workers throughout the United States who have been the victims of age discrimination at the company. Our firm currently represents three former employees, though we have reason to believe that numerous others throughout the country have been the victims of similar discrimination.

If you think you may have been fired, laid off, or denied a promotion because of your age at Mainfreight, Inc., are over 40 years old, and work or worked in either the Sales or Operations departments, we would like to speak with you. Please contact Christine Clarke at (212) 509-1616.

Disability Discrimination Jury Verdict

BMBB Law — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:05:10 +0000

On April 21, 2011, after a two-week trial and 13 hours of deliberations, a jury rendered a verdict finding that a social worker, represented by Margaret McIntyre and John Beranbaum, was discriminated against because of her disability when she was denied a promotion. The case was heard in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York.

The case is Siracuse v. Program for Development of Human Potential. In a nutshell, the plaintiff, a social worker with 16 years tenure and terrific qualifications, had cancer and received treatment for the better part of a year. She had to miss work intermittently that year for her treatment and the resulting fatigue. After her treatment was over and her cancer was in remission, a supervisory position opened up at the agency. Despite having a Masters of Social Work degree, she was passed over for the position in favor of a person without an advanced degree and who, we asserted, lacked comparable experience. For their part, the agency claimed that they were under financial pressure and had eliminated the position, distributing its responsibilities to other people.

The jury found that defendant discriminated against plaintiff because of her cancer, in violation of the New York City Human Rights Law. However, they found no violation of the anti-retaliation provision under the Family and Medical Leave Act. The jury granted the plaintiff all of her economic damages ($38,500) and $40,000 in pain and suffering damages, with the judge to decide the amount of attoreny’s fees due plaintiff.

Supreme Court’s Decision in Kasten Less Than Meets The Eye

BMBB Law — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 19:48:22 +0000

The major Federal employment statues also protect employees from being retaliated against for asserting their rights under those laws. The Federal law that requires that employers pay minimum and overtime wages (the Fair Labor Standards Act) provides that an employer can’t retaliate if an employee “has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to” the FLSA.

Yesterday the Supreme Court in Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp. held 6-2 that a protected “complaint” can be either written or oral. Justice Breyer wrote for the majority. What’s interesting about the case is the question it expressly didn’t decide: whether a protected “complaint” may be made to the employer, or if it has to be made to a court or governmental authority. There was actually little doubt that an oral complaint was protected - aside from the case below, there were no circuit court decisions holding otherwise. However, there is a circuit split about whether a complaint to the employer is protected. Saying yes are the First, Third, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits, along with the Fourth Circuit which strongly implied that it would protect such complaints. Ball v. Memphis BBQ, 228 F.3d 360 (4 Cir. 2000).

Standing alone in holding that a complaint to an employer is not protected is the Second Circuit, see Lambert v. Genesee Hosp., 10 F.3d 46, 55 (2d Cir.1993). Curiously, the Supreme Court noted this split in discussing why it granted cert, but, since Lambert didn’t turn on whether the complaint was written or oral, but rather who it was made to, the Supreme Court actually doesn’t resolve the circuit split for which it allegedly granted cert! So, for the time being, the law is unchanged in the Second Circuit - an employer does not violate the FLSA if it fires an employee who complains internally about not getting paid overtime or minimum wages. Fortunately, the New York Labor Law protects internal complaints, so an employee who is the victim of such retaliation still has a state court remedy in New York.

With Scalia and Thomas in dissent arguing that internal complaints are not protected whether written or oral, one wonders if Judge Breyer could not get five votes, since Justice Kagan abstained from the case, for the broader proposition that internal complaints are protected.

BERANBAUM MENKEN FALSE CLAIMS ACT CLIENT SHARES $18,000,000 SETTLEMENT

BMBB Law — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 20:34:51 +0000

Just last month an $18,000,000 settlement was reached in a case where Beranbaum Menken partner Bruce Menken and co-counsel, David Koenigsberg, represented a False Claims Act whistle blower in a Qui Tam case against Young Adult Institute, Inc. (”YAI”). YAI is the largest operator of residential facilities and other programs for developmentally disabled individuals in New York and receives most of its funding from Medicaid. The Complaint alleged that YAI unlawfully obtained Medicaid funds by presenting false and fraudulent claims to federal and state agencies. After Beranbaum Menken and Koenigsberg filed their lawsuit, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York and the New York State Attorney General intervened in the case and a settlement was reached to restore the misappropriated funds to the tax payers and reward the former YAI employee for his disclosure.

BERANBAUM MENKEN CLIENT SETTLES DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION CASE FOR $1,390,000

BMBB Law — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 19:44:51 +0000

Beranbaum Menken successfully vindicated the rights of a clinical psychologist who was fired by the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation (HHC) because of his visual impairment, despite his 20 years of devoted service. Our client, who is legally blind, was well-liked by his patients, respected by his peers and admired by his students as an excellent and empathic clinician. Unfortunately, after abruptly discontinuing his reasonable accommodations, HHC trumped up allegations of poor performance and fired him because of his disability. Beranbaum Menken partner Bruce Menken represented the psychologist in a labor arbitration and, after an arbitration that lasted 8 days, the arbitrator ordered HHC to pay our client full back pay and benefits and reinstate him to his job. Rather than reinstate him, HHC agreed in late December 2010 to pay $1,390,000 in full settlement of his claims.

Advertisement in Russian for Project OHR Employees

BMBB Law — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 23:03:00 +0000

Below is information in Russian for employees of Project OHR, relating to the pending lawsuit Severin v. Project OHR, case no. 10CV09696 in the Southern District of New York. An English translation follows.

ВНИМАНИЮ ВСЕХ НЫНЕШНИХ И БЫВШИХ СОТРУДНИКОВ КОМПАНИИ PROJECT OHR

Если Вы работали в компании Project OHR в качестве социального работника (home attendant) и не получали требуемую законом минимальную заработную плату из расчета не менее $7,25 за каждый час работы (включая каждый час, отработанный в ночное время) или не получали доплату в 50% за каждый час работы сверх 40 часов в неделю, то специалисты адвокатской фирмы Beranbaum Menken LLP хотели бы побеседовать с Вами. Фирма Beranbaum Menken LLP подала иск от имени бывшего социального работника (home attendant) компании Project OHR о нарушении порядка выплаты минимальной заработной платы и оплаты сверхурочной работы. Среди прочего, мы утверждаем, что принятый в компании Project OHR порядок оплаты ночной работы по единой ставке (обычно $18), а не по схеме минимальной заработной платы, нарушает закон. Адвокаты нашей фирмы хотели бы побеседовать со всеми, кто работал для компании Project OHR и не получил полагающуюся заработную плату. Просим Вас связаться с адвокатами Джейсоном Розджером (Jason Rozger) или Дженнифер Смит (Jennifer Smith) по телефону (212) 509-1616. За обсуждение этого вопроса с нашими специалистами плата не взимается.

Beranbaum Menken LLP
80 Pine Street, 33rd Floor
New York, NY 10005
(212) 509-1616
www.nyemployeelaw.com

TO ALL PRESENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES OF PROJECT OHR
If you worked for Project OHR as a home attendant, and you were not paid the legally required minimum wage of at least $7.25 per hour for each hour you worked (including each of the hours that you worked overnight), or if you were not paid one and a half times your regular pay for the hours worked greater than forty in a week, then the law firm of Beranbaum Menken LLP would like to speak with you. Beranbaum Menken LLP has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a former Project OHR home attendant for minimum wage and overtime violations. Among other things, we allege that Project OHR’s policy of paying a flat rate (usually $18) for working overnight, rather than the minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, violates the law. Attorneys at this firm are interested in speaking with anyone who worked for Project OHR and was not paid their proper wages. Please call attorneys Jason Rozger or Jennifer Smith at (212) 509-1616. There is no charge for speaking with us about this matter.
Beranbaum Menken LLP
80 Pine Street, 33rd Floor
New York, NY 10005
(212) 509-1616
www.nyemployeelaw.com.

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Project OHR

BMBB Law — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 22:57:22 +0000

Beranbaum Menken LLP has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a former Project OHR home attendant for minimum wage and overtime violations. Among other things, we allege that Project OHR’s policy of paying a flat rate (usually $18) for working overnight, rather than the minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, violates the law. Attorneys at this firm are interested in speaking with anyone who worked for Project OHR and was not paid their proper wages. Please call attorneys Jason Rozger or Jennifer Smith at (212) 509-1616. There is no charge for speaking with us about this matter.

The lawsuit is captioned Severin v. Project OHR and was filed in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.

Domestic Workers’ Bill of Rights Takes Effect in New York

BMBB Law — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:27:05 +0000

On November 29, 2010, the Domestic Workers’ Bill of Rights took effect in New York State, making this the first state to provide explicit workplace protections to domestic workers. The new law provides greater rights and protections to thousands of nannies, housekeepers, elder companions, cleaners, baby-sitters and cooks in private households, and imposes substantial new responsibilities on those who employ them. Among other provisions, this law gives domestic workers:
* The right to overtime pay at time-and-a-half after 40 hours of work in a week, or 44 hours for workers who live in their employer’s home;
* A full day of rest every seven days, or overtime pay if they agree to work on that day;
* Three paid days of rest each year after one year of work for the same employer; and
* Protection under New York State Human Rights Law, and the creation of a special cause of action for domestic workers who suffer sexual or racial harassment.

Beranbaum Menken LLP looks forward to working with domestic workers to enforce the protections this new law provides.