In the lawsuit, the three women — two of whom worked as an administrative assistants and another as a biller — established themselves as solid performers, but when it was discovered that they were pregnant or suspected of being pregnant, they were harassed by their employer, falsely accused of poor performance and later fired. The employees had only been with the company for less than a year. Two were fired in October 2006; the third was fired in March 2007.
Steven Mitchell Sack successfully reached a settlement on behalf of a dental hygienist who was allegedly sexually harassed by her boss. The woman was fired after she filed a sexual harassment complaint to the owner of the dental practice (and the alleged perpetrators) and told the owner that she would no longer tolerate her boss’ physical groping and sexual comments related to her body.
With Mr. Sack’s assistance, the woman filed a complaint against the dentist with the New York City Human Rights Commission. The settlement included money to compensate her for her emotional pain and suffering and loss of future wages.
According to the executive search firm Battalia Winston, 96% of corporations surveyed stated that they would hold holiday parties for their employees this year ― its highest level since 1997. That is up from 91% last year and 74% from two years ago. The survey also showed that 89% of the companies intended to spend the same as last year or more than last year.
For these companies, attorney Steven Mitchell Sack, “The Employee’s Lawyer,” suggests ways to minimize litigation that may arise from situations brought on during corporate holiday parties.
Mr. Sack’s tips include:
Attorney Steven Mitchell Sack, “The Employee’s Lawyer,” is scheduled to appear on tonight’s edition of “Today’s Verdict,” which airs at 6:30 p.m. on BronxNet.
Mr. Sack will discuss employees’ privacy rights when it comes to their employers, namely the employees’ health information. The topics include whether employers can collect their employees’ health information and possibly use it against them and how the workers and the company (in the interest of a business) can protect themselves from such conduct.
Attorney Steven Mitchell Sack, “The Employee’s Lawyer,” says the recent New York State Court of Appeals decision regarding baristas’ share of their tips may have a ripple effect on all servers in New York who work at bars, diners, restaurants and coffee shops.
CVS has outraged many by announcing that it wants all employees who wish to use its health plan to submit health information such as weight, body fat, and blood sugar. Those who don’t comply with the drug store chain’s new policy will face a $600/year fine. To debate the merits and fairness of this move, Fox & Friends‘ Brian Kilmeade invited Steven Mitchell Sack, an employment attorney and author, and John Banzhaf, a law professor. Things quickly got heated.
Attorney Steven Mitchell Sack, “The Employee’s Lawyer,” appeared on “Fox & Friends” this morning to discuss CVS’ new work policy requiring its employees to disclose their personal health information or else pay a fine. He said the policy potentially violates the law, especially because the employees are being forced to consent to this policy.
Attorney Steven Mitchell Sack, “The Employee’s Lawyer,” has been retained by the Eastern Outdoor Reps Association (EORA) and The National Shoe Travelers (NST) as General Counsel throughout the 2013 year.
Steven Mitchell Sack appeared on “FOX & Friends” on December 7 to discuss how negative statements and comments about a business, competitor, contractor or person on the Internet may expose the author to expensive litigation.
Most employees do not know how to resign properly. The slightest mistake can cause the forfeiture of valuable benefits. Some people resign without receiving a job offer from a new employer. Later, after learning the new job did not materialize, they are unable to be rehired by their former employer and spend months out of work unnecessarily. Others are tricked by a company and told to resign instead of getting fired. The problem is that they then learn the hard way they are not entitled to collect valuable unemployment compensation benefits as a result of this.