Answers Posted By Christopher Ezold

Answer to Non-Compete, Contract Employment

Your assumption may be correct

Before I respond to your question, I must state that we have not met, you have not retained me, that I have not reviewed your documents or the facts surrounding your question. Therefore, my answer is for informational purposes only, and you should retain an attorney to advise you on your rights and obligations relating to this issue.

That being said, there is a good chance that your non-compete is not effective against prospective employers whom you were acquainted with prior to your previous employer. First, the agreement will likely be construed strictly against the employer; as it clearly states that you are only forbidden to work for entities "introduced to [you] through" your former employer, the words themselves should protect you.

Second, the agreement is only enforcible to protect your previous employer's legitimate business interests. Protecting the relationships it has built with its customers or contractors is a legitimate business interest; however, precluding you from using relationships you built prior to employment is not a legitimate business interest.

However, as I have not reviewed the agreement, I cannot give you a thorough opinion. Feel free to call me to discuss this issue further.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
401 City Line Avenue,
Suite 904
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
CEzold@Ezoldlaw.com

posted Jul 9, 2004 09:10 AM [EST]

Answer to witholding pay

You appear to have a good basis to fight the Worker's Comp decision

Before I discuss your question, I must state that we have not met, I do not represent you, I have not reviewed your documents and the facts surrounding your case, and that this response is for informational purposes only, and cannot substitute for a consultation with an attorney.

That being said, you appear to be asking whether you should 'fight' denial of worker's compensation ("WC"). That denial appears to be due to your employer's representation to the WC Board that you were not at work (i.e. not paying you).

If you are being paid more than 30 days after your scheduled pay period, you may have a claim under the Wage Payment and Collection Law. However, a claim for lateness on one payment is most likely not worth making, as it will cost you more than you will get back. Should you not be paid at all, your claim might have more practical benefits for you.

If you have evidence that you were properly at work at the time of the injury, you should fight the WC decision. Your employer's representations to the WC Board appear to be fraudulent, and I recommend that you retain an attorney to appeal the decision. Should you decide to retain an attorney, do not reply to your employer until you have spoken with an attorney.

If you wish to discuss this issue further, please feel free to contact me at my email address below.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
401 City Line Avenue,
Suite 904
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
CEzold@Ezoldlaw.com


posted May 24, 2004 08:49 AM [EST]

Answer to witholding pay

You appear to have a good basis to fight the Worker'

posted May 24, 2004 08:42 AM [EST]

Answer to Pre-Startup Question

Answer depends on whether you are an employee or an equity owner

Before I respond to your question, I must state that we have not met, you have not retained us as your attorneys, my response is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice, and that my responses to your questions will almost certainly change based upon facts not provided in your questions.

That being said, my response depends on whether you are an employee or an equity owner. You state that you are 'working' for the company, but also that you are putting in 'sweat equity.' If your work provides you with an equity interest in the company, then you may not have a legal right to wages while you are working. If not, you may have a legal right to at least minimum wage.

It would probably be impossible for the company to promise you an unspecified job now. Legally, promises that are vague and speculative are difficult to enforce, even if codified in a contract. Practically, if there is no definite position for you when the company starts up, then it would be unwise for them to promise one.

You can still attempt to guarantee yourself some compensation; you can negotiate a contract promising payment, equity or other consideration for your work. If a position is clearly going to be available, then that could also be on the table.

Regardless, unless you are getting paid now, there cannot be a true guarantee from a 'pre-startup' company that you will see the fruits of your labors. The incidence of failure for startup companies is too high for any guarantee.

If you wish to discuss this issue further, feel free to call me at the number below.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
401 City Line Avenue,
Suite 904
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
CEzold@Ezoldlaw.com

posted May 20, 2004 3:43 PM [EST]

Answer to NSF paychecks getting to be a habit

A contract may alter your rights.

As a follow up, I should note that if you have a contract of employment, your contract will control your rights to quit.

Finally, if you don't care about unemployment, and you don't have a contract, you can quit at any time. Pennsylvania is an employment-at-will state, meaning that you may quit at any time, for any reason, with no notice, unless you have a contract that alters your rights to do so.

posted May 10, 2004 2:17 PM [EST]

Answer to NSF paychecks getting to be a habit

You can likely quit and receive Unemployment Compensation benefits.

First, I must state that we have not met, I have not reviewed your documents or the facts of your issues other than the short paragraph that you posted on MEL, and that there may be facts or issues relating to your question that I therefore am not aware of, which could significantly change my response. My response is for informational purposes only, and you should consult with an attorney directly if you wish to pursue your issues in the legal system. Finally, you are not a client nor has an attorney-client relationship been created via this website.

That being said, you may most likely quit and receive unemployment benefits. You may quit a job and receive unemployment if you quit for necesseitous and compelling reasons. Not being paid is one of those reasons. However, if your back pay is up to date, I am unaware of any case law that would allow you to quit based on prior late payments of less than pay period each.

If you wish to quit, it would be wisest to quit once a check has bounced, but before your employer makes good on it. Quitting while owed back wages should allow you to collect unemployment while you seek another, more solvent, employer.

If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me to discuss.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
401 City Line Avenue,
Suite 904
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
CEzold@Ezoldlaw.com

posted May 10, 2004 2:14 PM [EST]

Answer to does a change in job dutied void a non-compete?

You may be able to void your non-compete

Before I answer your question, I must state that I do not represent you, that we have not met, that I have not reviewed any of your documents or the non-compete agreement, and that my answer to your question cannot be complete without a full review of your documents and the facts of your employment, and that my answer is therefore for informational purposes only.

That being said, I do not believe that the question you pose has been conclusively answered by the Pennsylvania courts. As long as you sign your non-compete agreement on or before the date you begin work, and assuming your non-compete agreement is otherwise valid, all your employer needs to give you in exchange for your promise not to compete is your employment. It would therefore stand to reason that if the employment you have been given is reduced, that the non-compete may no longer be valid. The opposing argument, however, is that a non-compete survives the taking away of your employment, and therefore, it should survive the reduction of your employment as well. How this question would be resolved by the courts likely depends on the facts of your employment, which I do not currently know and cannot comment on.

Your non-compete may be invalid for other reasons, including overbreadth of geography or time, lack of business reason for the non-compete or failure to get your signature in a timely manner. If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me at the below number.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
401 City Line Avenue,
Suite 904
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
CEzold@Ezoldlaw.com

posted Apr 20, 2004 12:29 PM [EST]

Answer to Abusive Boss / Harrasment / Humiliation / Age Discrimination?

Real reason for termination

Depends on the real reason for termination;no-one else term'd? still hiring? comments re age or sex? who's going to do your work? Please call if you wish to discuss.

posted Mar 24, 2004 5:06 PM [EST]

Answer to Fired after six years of no warnings and great reviews

Need facts

There is no "right" to a job in PA. Whether you have a claim depends on the real reason for firing you, ie was it because of discrimination. Do you have a contract or belong to a Union? Call if you wish to discuss.

posted Mar 24, 2004 5:01 PM [EST]

Answer to Co-worker w/same title makes a lot more money

Possibly . . .

Before I answer your question, I must state that I do not represent you, that we have not met, that I have not reviewed any documents or material provided by you, and that there are facts missing from your question that would change my answer depending on their nature.

That being said, I cannot answer your question because critical information is missing. In Pennsylvania, an employer may pay similar employees differently, as long as that difference in pay is not based on the employees' gender, race, religion, national origin, disability, age or other protected characteristic.

Pennsylvania law in this area is based on very similar Federal law. Furthermore, the Federal Equal Pay Act makes it illegal for an employer to pay men and women different wages for the same or substantially similar jobs.

Depending on whether your position and your co-worker's position would be considered the same or substantially similar under the EPA, you may have an Equal Pay Act claim. Furthermore, you may have claims of discrimination under both federal and state law.

There are a number of actions you can take internally to remedy this situation; primarily, you should complain, in writing, through whatever EEO or grievance procedure is available through your employer's policies. However, I would not recommend doing so without consulting an attorney first.

I cannot answer your question any further without more information. If you would like to discuss the matter further, please feel free to contact me at my addresses or number below.

/Christopher E. Ezold/
Nancy O'Mara Ezold, P.C.
401 City Line Avenue,
Suite 904
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
(610) 660-5585
CEzold@Ezoldlaw.com

posted Mar 8, 2004 09:02 AM [EST]