The Employment Brief | Employment Law | Kollman & Saucier, P.A.

Court Enforces Hair Club Non-Compete

Kollman & Saucier

09/14/2016

A federal court in Alexandria, Virginia enforced a non-compete clause against a former employee of Hair Club for Men in Tysons Corner who stole 25 clients and set up a competing hair replacement business. Hair Club for Men, LLC v. Ehson, et. al., No. 1:16-cv-236 (E.D.Va. Aug. 31, 2016). However, the Court found Hair Club's non-solicitation clause unenforceable. The defendant former employee worked for Hair Club from 2011 to July 2014, when...

Kollman & Saucier

09/12/2016

Virginia Employment Law

On September 8, 2016, the Supreme Court of Virginia ruled that an employee who sues his employer for retaliatory discharge under Code §40.1-51.2:1 after making a health or safety complaint is not entitled to an award of punitive damages. Property Damage Specialists Inc. v. Rechichar. The Court reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court for Shenandoah County, where a jury had awarded both compensatory and punitive damages to a discharged...

Kollman & Saucier

09/09/2016

Age Discrimination, Employment Discrimination, Race Discrimination

A recent decision from a D.C. federal court offers a reminder that employers who investigate workplace disputes and make employment decisions based on documented evidence put themselves in a better position to defeat lawsuits challenging those decisions. Ladson v. George Wash. Univ., No. 14-cv-001586 (D.D.C. Sept. 1, 2016). Todd Ladson was a 24 year veteran of the George Washington University (GW) campus police when, in 2013, he was accused of...

Kollman & Saucier

09/07/2016

Employment Discrimination

A recent decision out of a Maryland federal court offers a simple, yet important, reminder for employers: do not make employment decisions because an employee has taken, is on, or might take maternity leave. EEOC v. Dimensions Healthcare Sys., No. 15-2342 (D. Md. Sept. 2, 2016). Cassandra Crawford worked for Dimensions Healthcare System (DHS) from May 2007 until 2014. She started as an appeals coordinator in DHS’s Patient Financial Services...

Kollman & Saucier

09/05/2016

Labor Law

Twenty-nine years ago this week, on September 8, 1987, I began my legal career at the law firm then known as Venable, Baetjer & Howard. The late Sam Cook, Chairman of the firm's Labor & Employment Department asked me if I had enjoyed my "Management Day" holiday the preceding day. Even since, I've had a special affinity for the first Monday in September, and today I offer some thoughts on a couple of trending topics in the world of labor...

Kollman & Saucier

09/01/2016

Labor Law

Less than a week after the National Labor Relations Board ruled that teaching assistants at private universities are employees under the National Labor Relations Act, graduate assistants in 10 Yale academic departments filed separate petitions for union elections with the Board. The union seeking to represent the graduate assistants, UNITE HERE Local 33, is asking for separate elections under the NLRB's 2011 Specialty Healthcare decision, which...

Darrell VanDeusen

08/25/2016

Labor Law

School is nearly back in session. But rather than be satisfied with some new pens and notebooks, the NLRB’s “back to school list” is huge. First, there was announcement of the Board’s decision in Columbia University, 364 NLRB No. 90 (Aug. 23, 2016) that graduate students are employees and can form unions. The Board’s 3-1 decision reversed a 2004 decision that held just the opposite. Second, the Board released decisions in Seattle...

Darrell VanDeusen

08/24/2016

Direct Evidence, Employment Discrimination

In an effort to clarify the way discrimination claims are evaluated by judges in the Circuit, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has overruled Circuit precedent requiring employees to prove allegations through either a “direct” or an “indirect” method that showed a “convincing mosaic” of discrimination. Ortiz v. Werner Enters., Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 15284 (7th Cir. Aug. 19, 2016). The underlying facts of the case are...

Kollman & Saucier

08/22/2016

Agency Activity, Employment Discrimination, Sex Discrimination, Sexual Orientation

On August 18, 2016, a federal district court ruled that a Michigan funeral home did not violate Title VII by firing a transgender employee, who was transitioning from male to female, because the employee intended to “dress as a woman” at work. EEOC v. R.G. & G.R. Funeral Homes, Inc., E.D. Mich., No. 14-13710, 8/18/16 The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ruled the funeral home was entitled to a religious exemption...

< 1 … 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 … 128 >

Email Updates

Court Enforces Hair Club Non-Compete

Virginia Supreme Court Strikes Punitive Damage Award

Officer’s Behavior Dooms Discrimination Claims

Don’t Make Employment Decisions Because An Employee Took Maternity Leave

Labor Day Musings

Yale Graduate Assistants Seek Union Elections in Ten Departments

Colleges and Universities on Labor Board’s Hit Parade This Week

“Direct” v. “Indirect” Discrimination Tests: Seventh Circuit Says There’s No Difference

Court Rules Against EEOC On Transgender Discrimination Claim

Email Updates