Answers Posted By Christopher Ezold

Answer to Man highered at a higher position than an experienced female

If a less qualified man is hired for a job you applied for, it may be discrimination.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, if a less qualified man is hired for a job you applied for, it may be gender discrimination. If you have not applied for the job, or at least made known that you wanted the position if it opened up, then there may be no claim. A significant part of the claim will be the importance of a college degree versus experience and licenses. These are fact questions that cannot be answered from your inquiry.

Generally, it is illegal to pay a man and a woman differently for the same work. As the younger man is performing a higher-level function, the disparity in pay is unlikely to give rise to a claim.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com



posted Mar 5, 2009 4:57 PM [EST]

Answer to Vacation Time

Generally, an employer may not cut vacation pay already earned.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, generally, an employer may not cut vacation pay already earned. The issue is what has been earned. An employer may offer vacation pay, but offer only vacation pay that is NOT payable upon quit or termination. Therefore, only vacation pay that is usable while employed has been earned. An employer MAY NOT retroactively change what is earned, however.

If your husband's company only offered vacation pay that is payable at 75% upon change of status, then there is little that can likely be done. However, that would be an extremely unusual fact situation; I suspect that you could enforce a 100% payout.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com



posted Feb 24, 2009 10:30 AM [EST]

Answer to Calling on new customers and not established clients

Noncompetition agreements may only be enforced to protect an employer's customer relationships.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, SOME noncompetition agreements may only be enforceable to the extent that it is necessary to protect an employer's customer relationships. The reason this applies only to some noncompetition agreements is that to be enforceable, noncompetition agreements must be necessary to protect an employer's legitimate business interest. Mere competition is not a legitimate business interest (we are a free capitalist society after all); instead, the money invested in training a person new to an industry, or trade secrets, or customer relationships managed by the employee are legitimate business interests. If the only interest to protect is customer relationships, some courts have held that forbidding ANY competition is too broad, and only enforced the agreement to the extent of preventing the former employee from contacting or selling to former customers for a period of time.

I cannot tell from your question whether this would be true in your case. I would suspect that, if the agreement were enforceable at all (which they sometimes are not), it would be enforceable to the extent that you could not solicit your own former customers for a period of time.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com


posted Feb 24, 2009 09:31 AM [EST]

Answer to 12 month period for FMLA

The twelve-month period in which leave can be taken can vary.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, the twelve-month period in which leave can be taken can vary. The employer gets to choose which twelve-month period applies, but has to apply it objectively and uniformly to all employees, and must notify employees of a change in the calculation method. The four methods to use are:

1. A calendar year starting January 1;
2. A twelve-month period starting on a date chosen by the employer;
3. A twelve-month period starting on the date an employee's FMLA leave begins; or
4. A "rolling" twelve-month year measured backwards from the date an employee begins an FMLA leave period.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com



posted Feb 20, 2009 10:19 AM [EST]

Answer to fired vs quit

Employers want to say you quit the job because that may prevent you from getting unemployment.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, employers want to say you quit the job because that may prevent you from getting unemployment. He demanded your decision immediately because he didn't want you to think about it; he gave you an option that would have allowed you to work for a little bit longer, or an option that would have let you look for work immediately. He was setting a trap.

Whether the trap works is another question. Clearly, the offer wasn't for continued employment, but for a very limited employment. You will need to explain the truth to the UC Board; I suggest you discuss this with an attorney first, as the issue may be legally complex, although factually simple.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com


posted Feb 9, 2009 08:07 AM [EST]

Answer to bounced payroll checks

You can insist on wages being paid, but cannot force direct deposit.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, you can insist on wages being paid, but cannot force direct deposit. Failure to pay wages on the regularly scheduled payday is a violation of the Wage Payment and Collection Law (WPCL). The WPCL does not require, however, that employers who bounce checks must pay via direct deposit, etc.

Such a requirement is unlikely to help you, however. If the check bounces, there is no money in the account; direct deposit wouldn't help, and a certified check wouldn't be issued without money in the account. It sounds as if your employer is giving out paychecks knowing that they are going to bounce.

You can, of course, quit if your employer won't pay you via direct deposit, etc., but you'll likely find that the payments still aren't being made on time. Situations like this generally indicate that the employer is failing. You should start looking for a job now.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com


posted Jan 26, 2009 10:31 AM [EST]

Answer to Intrepreting a Union Contract

Multiple contracts in a union situation creates a great deal of complexity.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, multiple contracts in a union situation creates a great deal of complexity. No attorney can answer your question without reviewing the union contract and whatever other contract you executed with the employer. It is apparent that there are far too many facts missing from your question for me to be able to answer it in this forum. You should call an employment attorney immediately.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com



posted Jan 6, 2009 08:28 AM [EST]

Answer to VACATION PAY

Your employer may not take away your earned vacation pay.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, your employer may not take away your earned vacation pay. The key question here is 'earned' - if it has not yet been earned, they may take the unearned portion of vacation pay off the table as an item of compensation. At that point, if you don't like the wages/compensation you're being offered, your only recourse is to find another job.

Also, if you owe your employer money, they may be able to offset your debt against your pay to a certain extent.

However, if you do not owe your employer and you have earned vacation pay, it may not be taken away from you. You would have a claim for your vacation pay, plus a 25% penalty and your attorney's fees as damages.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com


posted Jan 6, 2009 08:13 AM [EST]

Answer to salary cuts

If you have a contract stating your salary amount, your employer may not reduce your salary.

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, if you have a contract stating your salary amount, your employer may not reduce your salary. The contract may allow your employer to do so; unless I review the contract, I cannot tell. Furthermore, if your 'written agreement' is merely an offer letter, then you may not have a contract setting your salary. Some offer letters are, however, contracts. Finally, if the contract term is up this month, the employer may be able to set salary rates next month. In summary, if you have a contract, and it sets forth your salary, generally the employer may only reduce the salary if the contract allows.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com


posted Dec 18, 2008 09:37 AM [EST]

Answer to Can a non compete apply to select employees even if they hold the same position as others not asked

A noncompete can be presented to only select employees; however, it may require payment in this case

Before I respond to your inquiry, I must state that we have not spoken, I have not reviewed the relevant documents and facts, and I do not represent you. Therefore, my discussion below is not a legal opinion, but is informational only. Finally, my discussion applies only to issues to which Pennsylvania or Federal law apply, unless otherwise specified.

That being said, a noncompete can be presented to only select employees; however, it may require payment in this case. Since the noncompetition agreement is being presented to employees who are already employed, the law requires that they receive something of value for their agreement - cash, promotions, valuable perks, etc. The value of the noncompete to those employees in practical terms is essentially whatever it would take to keep them from leaving. This sounds like it could be a messy situation; the best method of resolving it is likely a negotiated agreement between the doctors, without burdening the employees.

If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below address(es) or number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
One Belmont Avenue,
Suite 501
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
Cezold@Ezoldlaw.com
www.ezoldlaw.com



posted Dec 7, 2008 07:08 AM [EST]