Looking for an employment lawyer who can best represent your interests?  As with choosing any lawyer, there are some basic considerations to ensure your rights are protected and that the attorney you work with is best representing your interests.

JOB APPLICANT FAIRNESS ACT: NEW LIMITS ON CREDIT CHECKS IN EMPLOYMENT

Effective October 1, 2011, the “Job Applicant Fairness Act,” prohibits employers from using an applicant’s or employee’s credit report or history to take a prohibited employment action against that individual.  Prohibited actions include denying employment to an applicant, discharging an employee, and determining  compensation or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment.  In today’s economic times, many of us have seen our credit score go down a bit.  Particularly in jobs where people may handle money, such as cashiers, bookkeepers and accountants, employers may be concerned that one’s financial difficulties could impact performance.  Even in jobs where one does not have access to money, there are prejudices against those who may have experienced financial problems.  This law is intended to stop that type of prejudice from happening.  Complaints alleging violations of this law should be filed with the Commissioner for Labor and Industry, Ronald DeJulis,  at Department of Labor Licensing  and Regulation.  For further information, please call our office.

UPDATE: HAMNER, ET AL. V. JOHN LEOPOLD, ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY

As many of you know, this office represents  Karla Hamner and Joan Harris, two women involved in the case against Anne Arundel County alleging discrimination against women based upon sexual harassment by the County Executive.  Since the beginning of the case, attorney’s being paid by the County’s Office of Law have spent countless hours at taxpayer expense attempting to discredit the allegations.   This defense has included claims of abuse by my office and the women. Despite repeated attempts, all these attorneys have managed to do is to get John Leopold off the hook personally and to leave all the liability on the County’s shoulders.  It would seem to be a clear conflict of interest to have the attorneys paid by the County effectively knocking out another defendant who would have had to share in paying any judgment. The County suffered from that decision, not the plaintiffs.  Despite attempts to get the cases thrown out, the County has been unsuccessful and we only await a judge’s ruling on whether these women will be forced to prosecute their case separately, each paying their own expenses, as opposed to being able to share the costs of bringing this action on behalf of all of the women working for the County.

The County has alleged that these women’s claims are of no substance and that they are just “disgruntled” employees. Unfortunately for them, not everyone agrees.  The State Prosecutor whose job consists of investigating and prosecuting corruption and illegal conduct by elected public officials seemingly believes the womens’ stories. He has spent many days and hours bringing witness after witness forward, including the police who drove Leopold around, as well as witnesses who are employed by the County to testify before a Grand Jury. Most folks believe that “where there is smoke, there is fire,” as this Grand Jury has continued to hear witnesses.  Action is expected soon and it is not out of the question that there will be indictments against numerous public officials who are are named or talked about in the lawsuit these women have brought.  You judge: disgruntled or courageous.  My bet is on the latter.

Due to the extremely low nature of fees set by the Unemployment Commission, we were previously unable to represent individuals before DLLR in hearings challenging the claimants’ eligibility to receive unemployment benefits. Fees were limited to $100 per hearing unless the attorney filed a special exception.  People who were challenging denials based on misconduct or “voluntary quit” issues were going without representation.  In today’s economy, the value of those benefits is immense often accounting for about $450 a week for almost 100 weeks.

That fee has now been raised by the Commission to two times the weekly benefit amount. Thus, we are now able to represent claimants at these hearings for a flat $750 charge for cases in the Baltimore City/County area or $800 if the travel is a little further.

We are happy we can now offer this as a service. Call if you need assistance.

Many union members may not be aware that this law firm provides legal services at discounted rates to members of labor organizations.  For over 30 years, our practice has been representing workers, including unions, regarding an array of matters affecting working men and women.  While our practice is primarily in the labor and employment law field we handle various other legal matters.

Over the years, our firm has represented union members in medical malpractice and other personal injury cases oftentimes getting them better results than others with no relationship to the union.  We handle personal injury cases of all types including automobile accidents workers’ compensation, etc.   Through our “of counsel” realtionships we have the capability to handle a variety of other legal matters.  The bottom line is that we take very special interest in protecting the rights of union members and of the unions that we represent.  If you or any member of your immediate family have any legal problems, call our firm and we will make sure that you get he very best representation possible.  If we cannot handle the matter I will find the best possible referrals available.  The discounts that we offer are generally applicable to our hourly rate, but may also apply to person injury cases as well.  Give us a call – you will be glad that you did.

Unemployment seems to be on the rise.  Oftentimes, the first reaction when a person loses their job is anger.  People may be believe that the loss of their job is unfair or  illegal.  Unfortunately, the large majority of workers seeking our legal assistance recently have been older workers.  When times get tough and employers need to cut labor costs, older, higher-paid workers are generally the first target.  A company can save a truckload more money getting rid of a highly paid executive rather than 10 production workers.  Most distressing about this trend is that older workers are finding it very difficult to find new employment.  There may be plenty of low paying jobs out there but not many for corporate executives.

If you find yourself in the unfortunate position of being called into HR and told that your services are no longer needed, you will most likely be presented with a severance and release package for your consideration.  It may give you 21 days to review it and an additional 7 days to revoke  after signing, but you may feel pressure, or be pressured by your former employer, to sign quickly. 

These are legal documents that have the effect of waiving many of your legal rights.  Please have an experienced employment law attorney review any severance document before you sign it.  It is a small investment compared to the rights and money that you may be throwing out the window.  Every week, we get calls from dozens of people who have lost their jobs.  KNOW YOUR RIGHTS before you sign them away.