Answers Posted By Aaron Maduff

Answer to Company has not reimbursed expenses or paid commissions

Reimburement of Expenses and Payment of Commissions

There are a whole host of laws that are involved here, from contract law to the Fair Labor Standards Act. There is a great deal you can do. But the first step really is to see an attorney.

posted Dec 5, 2001 4:59 PM [EST]

Answer to Non-Compete Clause within the Severance Package

The Non-Compete Clause May be Removed from the Severance Package

In some cases, Non-compete clauses can be invalidated as over reaching. This may be one of them. But more to the point is that severance packages are often the subject of negotiation. We have at least one attorney in the firm who does that regularly. The result may be increasing the severance payment or dropping the non-compete clause. It is generally a wise idea to have an attorney review a severance package in any event to make sure that you understand the scope of rights you may be waiving and any possible claims that you may have that you may not realize you have.
Aaron Maduff

posted Nov 16, 2001 10:33 AM [EST]

Answer to English Only Rule

English Only Rules are Discrminatory

The qestion is not whether there are grounds for it, but whether it is a discriminatory rule. The answer is that it is discriminatory. A rule which prevents the use of a foreign language in the workplace is violative of the National Origin provisions of Title VII because it discriminates against the nationality whose language has been banned. I would contact an attorney or go to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Aaron Maduff

posted Nov 14, 2001 8:05 PM [EST]

Answer to Is this age discrimination in compensation and eventual lay off?

No pay increase due to poor results

The question of discrimination is one of motive. If others are getting pay increases when your father is not, that may be age discrimination if the reason they are doing it is because of his age. The fact that others get pay increases does tend to belie the company's claim that the lack of a raise is the result of poor results (I am assuming we are talking about profits here, not your father's performance). However, you would need to show that everyone who is younger than he did get raises.
As for the severance package, a general release is common. If he signs the release and is replaced by someone younger, there may have been a valid age discrimination claim but he will have waived it. While he cannot waive his right to sue for future injuries, the fact that the company hires someone younger would only be evidence of age discrimination. The discriminatory act would have been his termination. Thus this would be waived by the severance agreement.
Usually, we will have someone fax us the severance agreement and we will review it prior to meeting with him or her. Then we can review what the severance agreement waives, and what possible claims the client might have. Then the client is in a better position to decide whether to take the severance package or pursue some form of suit.

posted Nov 13, 2001 11:15 PM [EST]

Answer to Employees forced to attend seminar

In response to the question of whether a company can fine you for not attending a seminar

As a general rule, as an employee, you are required to carry out the functions of your job. A company can make certain training which it provides a part of the job and require its personnel to attend. The key is whether it relates and when it is offered. As for the $50 charge, I find that a little bit more confusing. Is that a suspension or docking of pay? I would really like more information on that issue because if it is simply a situation where the company refused to pay for work done, that can violate various laws.

posted Nov 13, 2001 5:19 PM [EST]

Answer to Illegally taped private phone conversation.

Fired Because Fellow Employee Taped Conversation

You could certainly take the taped phone conversation to the state's attorney's office and ask them to prosecute the fellow employee for violations of the law. However, the state's attorney will decide whether or not to prosecute the case. If you can prove that the conversation was taped, by providing them a copy of the tape, or by showing them a letter from the employer stating that you were terminated because of comments that it heard on a taped phone conversation, they are probably more likely to prosecute the case then if you do not provide such evidence. As for the employer itself, by virtue of the tape, it has done nothing illegal (unless it was in a conspiracy with the fellow employee to get the conversation taped). On the other hand, whether you have a basis for suing the employer for terminating your employment depends upon its reasons for so doing. Employment in Illinois is generally at will. This means that you can quit at any time for any reason or no reason at all. It also means that the employer can fire you for any reason or no reason at all. The exception is where some statute identifies the reason as illegal. Statutes that might apply are those that address discrimination or retaliation. So now the content of the tape is very important. If for example the tape basically included a comment by you admitting to having a disability which qualifies you as disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act of which the employer was not previously aware (say for example sleep apnea) then there is the appearance that your termination was the result of that disability which is illegal. Or perhaps you admitted to your fellow employee on the tape that you had filed a claim of discrimination with the EEOC under one of the various laws it enforces. Then the appearance is that you were terminated in retaliation for having so filed. So it depends in large measure what was on the tape.

posted Oct 14, 2001 09:17 AM [EST]

Answer to Change of severance plan without notification

Validity of Revoked Severance Packages

This is a difficult question because an attorney would need to see the severance packages. As a general rule employment in Illinois is at-will. Thus an employer can change the severance package and if you don't like it, you can quit. However, where the package has been offered, if it is a firm offer which is available for 45 days then I would think it would still stand. But in order to determine whether the package does stand, one would have to review it. This is one circumstance where seeking information on MEL is not likely to be sufficient. You should take the package and your concerns to an attorney immediately.

posted Oct 12, 2001 03:37 AM [EST]

Answer to please help me-ada violations-harassament-work related discrimation

Retaliation for requesting an accommodation

What you are describing here is retaliation for requesting a reasonable accommodation. Under the ADA, if you suffer from a qualified disability your employer is required to reasonably accommodate you. However, you are required to ask for some accommodation before the onus falls on the employer to provide one. Therefore, requesting the accommodation as you have was a step toward preserving your rights under the ADA. As a result, any retaliatory conduct which the employer takes would arguably be illegal under the ADA.
I would immediately file charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, EEOC. In Chicago, the EEOC is located on the 28th floor of the Citibank building (which also houses Northwestern Trainstation) 500 W. Madison. You should also consider filing charges for disability discrimination and sexual harassment if that is what you are facing.
Be forewarned that the EEOC is overworked and complainants are occasionally asked not to file. You have a right to file your complaint and if you fail to do so, you will waive your rights under Federal Law.
You may also file with the Illinois Department of Human Rights for violations of the Illinois Human Rights Act. Again, in Chicago, the Department of Human Rights is located at 100 W. Randolph, 10th floor. This is the James Thompson Center (State of Illinois Building). They do not take charges on Fridays.
If you file with the Illinois Department of Human Rights, it will investigate and will either file a complaint with the Illinois Human Rights Commission or Dismiss your case. (There are other steps you can take at that time.) The EEOC on the other hand may try to mediate the situation for you and if it fails, even if it finds against you, you still retain the right to file a complaint in Federal Court.

posted Oct 12, 2001 03:16 AM [EST]

Answer to Unjustified layoff

A false reason for termination

It certainly appears based on the information provided in this question that the employer (manager) lied when he told you that you were terminated because of cut-backs. There is little question that when held to the standards most people's morals, this kind of action falls short. Nonetheless, the fact that something is immoral does not make it illegal. In Illinois employment is at-will. You can be fired for any but specific illegal reasons or no reason at all, and you can quit for any reason or no reason at all. So in examining this problem, I would like to know what the TRUE reason was for terminating you. In other words, why did the manager want this other person instead of you? If the manager's preference is based upon your gender, religion, race, national origin, a disability, your age over 40, retaltiation for filing complaints, retaliation for reporting illegal activity, because he is having relations with the other person or some of a few other reasons, then your termination is not only immoral, but illegal. Because most discrimination claims are proven by an indirect method of proof in which the Plaintiff shows that all people of the same class (e.g. black or Chinese) were terminated and the person hired was not of that class, and that the Plaintiff is qualified, it is up to the employer to state a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for terminating him or her. The Plaintiff may then prevail if he or she can prove the employer's reason to be false. In this case, if you can show that all people of your particular class (e.g. all black or Chinese employees) were terminated (and you may be the only black or Chinese employee), then the employer is going to have some difficulties because at least at the moment, it appears that his reason for terminating you is clearly a lie. But the ultimate issue is whether there is some form of discrimination at play and that is unlikely if you cannot point to something about you which makes you different from everyone else who was not terminated (and the person hired) and which falls into one of the categories discussed.

posted Sep 28, 2001 11:28 PM [EST]

Answer to Unjustified layoff

A false reason for termination

It certainly appears based on the information provided in this question that the employer (manager) lied when he told you that you were terminated because of cut-backs. There is little question that when held to the standards most people's morals, this kind of action falls short. Nonetheless, the fact that something is immoral does not make it illegal. In Illinois employment is at-will. You can be fired for any but specific illegal reasons or no reason at all, and you can quit for any reason or no reason at all. So in examining this problem, I would like to know what the TRUE reason was for terminating you. In other words, why did the manager want this other person instead of you? If the manager's preference is based upon your gender, religion, race, national origin, a disability, your age over 40, retaltiation for filing complaints, retaliation for reporting illegal activity, because he is having relations with the other person or some of a few other reasons, then your termination is not only immoral, but illegal. Because most discrimination claims are proven by an indirect method of proof in which the Plaintiff shows that all people of the same class (e.g. black or Chinese) were terminated and the person hired was not of that class, and that the Plaintiff is qualified, it is up to the employer to state a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for terminating him or her. The Plaintiff may then prevail if he or she can prove the employer's reason to be false. In this case, if you can show that all people of your particular class (e.g. all black or Chinese employees) were terminated (and you may be the only black or Chinese employee), then the employer is going to have some difficulties because at least at the moment, it appears that his reason for terminating you is clearly a lie. But the ultimate issue is whether there is some form of discrimination at play and that is unlikely if you cannot point to something about you which makes you different from everyone else who was not terminated (and the person hired) and which falls into one of the categories discussed.

posted Sep 28, 2001 11:27 PM [EST]