Katapult

Blog Posts by Tag: "legal hazards"

Bryan T. Symes

NLRB Schedules Vote on Portion of Proposed Changes to Election Rules

Through my September 7, 2011 blog post, I described the National Labor Relations Board’s ("NLRB") proposed "quickie election" rules designed to make unionization easier.... Read More

Bryan T. Symes

Prohibiting Religious Apologetics In The Workplace May Violate Title VII

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), which prohibits workplace discrimination based on several "protected classes," including religion, employers have a duty to accommodate the sincerely-held religious beliefs of employees, where employers know about such religious beliefs, such religious beliefs conflict with employment requirements, and accommodating such religious beliefs does not create "undue hardship." In Weathers v. FedEx Corporate Services, Inc., No. 09 C 5493, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125880 (N.D. Ill., Nov.... Read More

Bryan T. Symes

Employer’s Failure to Return Employee’s Telephone Calls Puts Employer Through The “Ringer” - Dials Up Retaliation Claim

Recently, another cautionary tale caught my eye—this one illustrates the significant consequences that can flow from an employer’s failure to take seemingly insignificant actions. The case is Hofferica v. St. Mary Med. Ctr., No. 10-6026, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106844 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 20, 2011).... Read More

Bryan T. Symes

Federal Court Makes Management of Mixed Vehicle Fleets More Onerous For Motor Carriers

Recently, a federal court in New York issued an opinion through which it concluded that several of Alpine Logistics’s delivery drivers are entitled to overtime compensation pursuant to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). The decision is Hernandez v. Alpine Logistics, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96708 (D.N.Y. Aug. 29, 2011). The Court’s opinion is significant because it represents the latest addition to what can be characterized as a hodgepodge of inconsistent federal opinions addressing the so-called "small vehicle exception" to the "motor carrier exemption" from overtime obligations under the FLSA (see The Employment and Labor Law Dispatcher blog for a basic explanation of the "motor carrier exemption" and "small vehicle exception").... Read More

Bryan T. Symes

New Labor Pains for Employers NLRB and DOL Each Deliver Union-Friendly Proposals

Recently, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") and the Department of Labor ("DOL") separately proposed new rules aimed at making unionization easier-ignoring the old adage, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." As explained below, the NLRB proposed a new set of representation pre-election procedures, popularly characterized as the "quickie election" rules, while the DOL proposes new rules that, if implemented, are certain to "chill" employers' use of important educational tools used to resist union-organizing efforts.... Read More

Bryan T. Symes

Are Dispatchers Exempt from Overtime? - Part III

What Remedies are Available if Violations are Found?

Despite the public outcry I received for continuing discussion of Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) exemptions—all good things must come to an end. Therefore, the following commentary is the final installment of my three-part series concerning the fundamental analysis one must go through to determine whether dispatchers should be classified as “exempt” or “non-exempt” for purposes of the FLSA.... Read More

Bryan T. Symes

Trucking Company Fails To Pull Its Weight: Does Not Establish Tow Truck Driver Is Exempt From Overtime

Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (which covers Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana) concluded that an Indianapolis tow-truck company failed to carry its legal burden to prove that one of its drivers is exempt from overtime compensation under the so-called "motor carrier exemption" to the Fair Labor Standards Act's ("FLSA"). The case is Johnson v. Hix Wrecker Service, Inc., No. 09-3023 (7th Cir., July 1, 2011).... Read More

Robert Franklin

The Importance of "Evidence Preservation": Part 8 - Dealing with the "Litigation Hold"

Preserving evidence in the event of an accident is crucial to minimizing one's liability exposure. This is Part 8 in a nine part series of related discussions. The full list of the parts to this series appears following this installment.

“Litigation Hold” is a commonly used term of art referring to the duty to preserve evidence when one has knowledge, actual or constructive, that such evidence is likely to be relevant to resulting litigation. The primary question is when such a duty is triggered. Once it is triggered, the issue then becomes the scope and timing of what action one should take, and what evidence one should preserve.... Read More

Robert Franklin

The Importance of "Evidence Preservation": Part 7 - Electronically Stored Information

Preserving evidence in the event of an accident is crucial to minimizing one's liability exposure. This is Part 7 in a nine part series of related discussions. The full list of the parts to this series appears following this installment.

The development of technology has dramatically changed the world in which we live. Not that long ago, email and other electronic forms of communication, and information storage, were a novelty. Now, they are commonplace. In fact, it has been estimated that 95% of all information is now digital, and that more than 3.2 trillion emails are sent annually.... Read More

Robert Franklin

The Importance of "Evidence Preservation": Part 6 - Records Retention

Preserving evidence in the event of an accident is crucial to minimizing one's liability exposure. This is Part 6 in a nine part series of related discussions. The full list of the parts to this series appears following this installment.

The specific minimum requirements for records retention by interstate carriers, brokers, and freight forwarders are set forth in Part 379 of 49 CFR. While such regulations are not binding upon an intrastate, or otherwise exempt, entity, many states have adopted 49 CFR, in whole or in part, so that they may effectively apply. Moreover, even when they are not specifically applicable, a plaintiff may well argue that they provide an example of reasonable conduct, and thus the failure to abide by them could be deemed to constitute negligence, or provide the basis for a spoliation claim.... Read More