— Employee Rights Category Archives — Page 8 of 10 — Dallas Employment Lawyer Blog Published by Dallas, Texas Employment Lawyers

Why Judicial Elections Matter in 2022

March 10, 2022 | Robert J. Wiley

Summary: This article gives a rundown of judicial elections in Texas: what they are, what positions are up for a vote, and why you should care about them.

Although many states elect at least some of their judges, as of 2020 Texas is one of only six states to run partisan (party-based) elections for all state judicial positions. If you were one of the 17 percent of Texans who voted in the March primary for the 2022 midterm elections, like me you probably encountered several pages of candidates for all sorts of judicial positions in your county and across the state. All kinds of judges, justices—and something called a “justice of the peace”? Some of the candidates were unopposed in their primaries and might even run unopposed in the general election, while other races had 3 or 4 candidates competing. Perhaps the information overload of all these judicial elections is one reason for Texas’s incredibly low primary turnout.

This article is meant to give a basic overview of some of these judicial positions, and to discuss why you should care about them.

Navigating the EEOC Process: Responding to the Employer’s Position Statement

February 4, 2022 | Deontae Wherry

Perhaps you have filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and you have been requested to respond to the employer’s position statement. But, you do not know where to start. You may be asking yourself a few questions such as “What is a position statement?” and “What should be included in my response to the employer’s position statement?”. This article will, hopefully, answer some of your questions concerning your response to the employer’s position statement.

A position statement is the employer’s responsive statement to the claims presented in the employee’s charge of discrimination. It is simply the employer’s opportunity to share its version of the facts. While the EEOC states a position statement should be “clear, concise, and complete,” position statements are often the complete opposite. They are generally inundated with policies that are unrelated to the claims at hand and a host of issues concerning the employee’s performance. However, do not panic—here are a few tips:

1. Read the employer’s position statement in its entirety – The purpose of this step is to ensure that you understand the basis of why the employer feels that it has not violated the law. When employees do not have attorneys, this is usually the first time when the employee learns of the employer’s position.

Cunning companies may try to circumvent Texas’s “conflict of law” rules for non-competes: what that means and what to watch out for

January 27, 2022 | Robert J. Wiley

Summary: This article discusses Texas conflict-of-law rules as they apply to non-compete agreements, and some ways that employers may try to get around those rules.

Various articles we have published address in general what a non-competition agreement is and what is required for one to be enforceable in Texas. But with Texas increasingly becoming a hub for large or even multinational companies, it can be much more confusing for workers to figure out what a non-compete their company insists they sign even means. That is especially true as companies may demand that employment documents be governed by some other state’s laws, or even another country’s.

This arcane choice can have profound consequences. Other states’ non-compete laws may be more protective of employees, or instead may allow an employer to get away with more restrictive limits on you. If you are dealing with a contract governed by some other state’s law, it may be a good idea to consult an attorney licensed in that state. However, even if you are in Texas, you should also ask yourself whether your employment agreement subjects you to another state’s non-compete laws, and what that might mean. This article is meant to give a basic overview of Texas’s so-called “conflict of law” rules when it comes to non-competes, as well as some closely related non-compete pitfalls.

Lights, Camera Action: Get Your Popcorn Ready – The Supreme Court is Back in Session and COVID-19 is on the Agenda!

January 6, 2022 | Rob Wiley, P.C.

Employment issues will again take center stage at the U.S. Supreme court on January 7, 2022, and appeals related to vaccine mandates are sure to be the main attraction. Alas, vaccine mandates will be squarely before the Court and audiences nationwide will soon receive some clarity from the nation’s highest Court regarding vaccine mandates in the workplace.

Enforcement of the Biden Administration’s vaccine mandates applicable to government contractors, CMS and large employers had been stayed or partially stayed by various federal courts. The OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) applicable to most employers having 100 or more employees was stayed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals prohibiting enforcement of the rule. However, on December 17, 2021, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which was chosen by lottery to hear the consolidated appeals challenging the ETS, dissolved the stay that the Fifth Circuit put in place. Thus, employers with 100 or more employees that are not specifically exempt from the standard due to disability or religious belief must now take steps to comply with the emergency rule. Judge Stranch delivered a gripping opinion addressing the question that has been vexing employers since the beginning of the pandemic:

Recognizing that the “old normal” is not going to return, employers and employees have sought new models for a workplace that will protect the safety and health of employees who earn their living there. In need of guidance on how to protect their employees from COVID-19 transmission while reopening business, employers turned to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA or the Agency), the federal agency tasked with assuring a safe and healthful workplace.

Texas v. New York: Which state offers more protections to employees? The answer will not surprise you.

December 2, 2021 | Rob Wiley, P.C.

It is no secret that in the past few years companies have been moving their principal places of business from progressive states, like California or New York, to Texas. Texas has been known as a “business-friendly” state, and for good reasons. Among other things, Texas has a healthy economy, a prime location in the center of the country, no state income tax, and affordable cost of living.

One major factor that doesn’t receive much publicity is Texas’s far less-restrictive labor & employment laws. After all, a company relocating thousands of its employees to work in Texas means a lesser risk of violating more restrictive laws in states like California or New York.

So how is Texas different from other progressive states when it comes to employee rights? To answer this, let’s explore some of the labor & employment laws of the state of New York.

Strategize your Resignation

November 11, 2021 | Paige Melendez

For employers and employees alike it is becoming apparent that there is a trend of employees leaving their workplaces. In Texas, the at-will doctrine allows an employee to leave for any reason or no reason, but sometimes resignations can be a bit more complicated. For employees it is complicated because resignations can be and should be used strategically rather than a simple decision to leave a job. To use a resignation strategically, there are a few things to consider and think about before pulling the plug.

First and foremost, leaving a job can evoke questions about eligibility for unemployment benefits. In Texas, resignations, except for narrow exceptions related to “good cause connected with the work,” can be fatal to an application for unemployment benefits. While every case is different, resignations likely spell the end for unemployment benefit eligibility. Yet, it ultimately comes down to the Texas Workforce Commission’s decision. Therefore, if unemployment benefits are part of the financial planning underpinning a resignation, it is important to keep this in mind.

If unemployment benefits are not a concern or can be overlooked, then resignation becomes a good option to leave an employer on amicable terms. Outside of a contractual obligation, there is generally no notice period requirement on resigning. Nonetheless, there are practical steps to take before submitting a notice of resignation to protect your best interest. By way of example, medical procedures that can be done while health insurance coverage is still fully paid by your employer, figuring out finances in case you cannot find a different job, how a resignation might look at your next employer, and finally, contractual obligations. The contractual obligations can be tricky and are typically governed by an employment contract that an employee signed at the beginning of employment. Contracts that govern resignations or leaving a job without cause sometimes have requirements like a notice period, a method of giving that notice like certified mail to a specific address, or even set out specific information that needs to be in a notice. Some contracts even have promises of severance.

Don’t Move the Goalpost

September 16, 2021 | Deontae Wherry

As a young athlete, I remember the phrase, “Don’t move the goalpost.”

The phrase is often used in sports to describe changing the criteria, or goal, while the game is still in progress. Outside of the sports arena, the phrase is commonly used as a metaphor when the goal is changed after someone has begun an act or process in an attempt to reach said goal. It may be perceived that a person is placed at an advantage or disadvantage when the goal is changed. Now as a lawyer, sometimes I find myself saying, “Don’t move the goalpost.”

As the client, you set the goals for your case. This is where you tell your attorney what your desired outcome is. If you don’t know what your options are, ask your attorney to walk through the potential outcomes. In many employment law cases, employees want a severance for lost wages, a neutral reference for prospective employers, a reasonable accommodation for a disability, or reinstatement of an old position. This is not an exhaustive list, but represents some of the common goals that clients desire. Be sure to sit down with your attorney to discuss all your options.

Employers are using AI in hiring practices. What could go wrong?

July 23, 2021 | Rob Wiley, P.C.

In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has invaded virtually every industry, from technology on your phone, to cameras at your city’s traffic lights, to drones used by the military. Employment and hiring practices are not exceptions.

AI systems are created by humans and then learn on their own by analyzing data. Over time, an AI system is supposed to improve its efficiency and results. In the employment context, AI is used in most steps of the hiring process, including advertising for the job, scanning resumes and job applications, selecting applicants for interviews, and even analyzing applicants’ facial expressions and behavior during recorded interviews.

Proponents for the use of AI in hiring practices claim it speeds up the hiring process, more accurately identifies the right candidates for the position, and eliminates human bias and subjectivity. In a survey conducted by LinkedIn, 67% of recruiters surveyed said AI saved them time and 43% of them said AI removed human bias from the hiring process. I can agree that AI saves time. But removing bias? Not so fast.

The (Harmful) Myth of the Perfect Plaintiff

June 18, 2021 | Paige Melendez

A common misconception in employment law is that to be a plaintiff you must have been or are a model employee. This myth prevents many potential plaintiffs from pursuing action against their employers. My aim in this article is to address this misconception and hopefully dispel it.

In its simplest form, employment law boils down to a three-step process: 1) there is discrimination or retaliation, 2) this discrimination or retaliation is because of a protected characteristic or protected activity and 3) an adverse action was taken against the employee as a result. Within this framework there are little details and deviations that cannot be ignored. However, in its simplicity it also showcases how the law does not expect perfection.

For employees experiencing discrimination and/or retaliation, having a disciplinary history may feel like an insurmountable obstacle to any employment claim they may want to pursue. This concern is the fuel that perpetuates the myth of the perfect plaintiff, but as the old adage goes, the devil is in the details.

A Quick-ish Answer to “What is a PPP or Prohibited Personnel Practice”

April 23, 2021 | Paige Melendez

Top10Blog-Post Most Federal employees enjoy an entire administrative regime dedicated to vindicating their unique rights. Out of this regime there are three big enforcement mechanisms that come to mind: Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) offices, the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), and the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). These three agencies are often entangled together, but each of them is dedicated in some way to addressing PPPs or prohibited personnel practices. A PPP is exactly what the name implies: certain practices in a Federal workplace that are unallowed under the law. The law lists out about 14 things which qualify as “prohibited.” It is important to note, however, that not all Federal employees can find relief through reporting these practices. Employees of local or state governments, uniformed military members, people who work in Congress or for the courts, United States Postal Service employees (except in specific situations), and finally employees of the FBI and CIA are not covered. The list of who is not covered is more expansive, than what is listed above, but those are the ones that may be the most relevant to the general body of Federal employees. To get a better idea of what the different PPPs are and how they would function, below are brief illustrations of the main PPPs using Official, an agency official in a supervisory capacity, C a favored employee, and D a non-favored employee.

First, there is a PPP that prohibits discrimination based on protected characteristics under federal law. This PPP tracks Title VII for the most part, but also adds in marital status and political affiliation to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability. Discrimination PPPs are handled primarily through a Federal agency’s EEO office, but the Office of Special Counsel may step in if the discrimination is based on marital status or political affiliation. Adversity based on political affiliation is also covered in a different PPP. For example, if Official attempted to influence D to hand out flyers for a specific political candidate or decided not to promote D because she refused to hand out flyers, it would be considered a separate PPP from discrimination based on political affiliation.

There are also four PPPs that have to do with violations of the merit systems that civil service is based off of. Things like considering a recommendation that was made by someone else outside of the agency. For example, if Official heard from Friend that C would be a good fit for the job and hires C based off of what Friend told him and not through his personal assessment – it is considered a PPP. Likewise if Official decided to give D an artificially low rating so that she would not be eligible for promotion, the Official would be considered to be “obstructing competition.” Official would also commit a PPP if he approached D and told her she should not apply for the promotion to remove her from competition because Official knew C was applying for the same job. In that same vein, Official could also not change the requirements for that promotion to give C an unauthorized advantage. Finally, if Official’s daughter were to apply to a position in his agency, Official could not hire her because she’s his daughter. This would also apply if Official called up his friend at another agency and attempted to influence the other agency to hire his daughter.