Updates from August, 2012 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 5:00 am on August 6, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Intertek,   

    Ex-employee files Pregnancy Discrimination charges against Intertek 

    A former lab analyst at Houston-based Intertek, has filed discrimination charges against the company with the EEOC. Coane and Associates is currently representing her at the EEOC.

    Our client is from Sri Lanka and was working for the company on a working visa. Once she got pregnant, however, it all went downhill at work, according to our client. She has complained to the EEOC about pregnancy discrimination and related causes of action.

    The employer allegedly harassed her at work once she they knew she was pregnant, and, after her maternity leave, promptly fired her two weeks later. The EEOC will be investigating the charges, after which the matter may be brought to court.

    Our law firm has handled many pregnancy discrimination cases, and the law is clear, that it is illegal to treat a pregnant employee differently than her co-workers and/or to single her out for unfair treatment.

    __________________________________________________________________________________________________

    About the author: Bruce Coane is an attorney who specializes in labor and employment law and immigration law, with offices in Florida and Texas. He may be reached at houstonlaw@aol.com, 713-850-0066 or 305-538-6800.

     
  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 10:00 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: sex discrimination, , Title VII discrimination law   

    Title VII – The Discrimination Law 

    In a decision released last week, The U.S. Supreme Court expanded the definition of who is covered by the retaliation provision of Title VII.

    Title VII is the discrimination law that protects employees from illegal discrimination in the workplace. It also protects individuals from retaliation for bringing a discrimination complaint. Who ever thought that it covered third parties, such as a co-worker spouse or partner? In the case of Thompson v. North American Stainless Steel, last week, the Supreme Court held that the spouse of a woman who complained about sex discrimination, could proceed with a retaliation lawsuit, after he was fired shortly after his wife complained about discrimination. The lower courts threw out his case, saying the law didn’t protect a non-complaining spouse from retaliation.

    I have often represented one spouse where both of them work at the same company, and have been concerned that the spouse who is still there could be fired too. Prior to this Supreme Court decision, it seemed pretty clear that the innocent spouse was not protected. This Supreme Court case, however, has made it clear that a spouse or close relative can proceed with a claim if they are retaliated against and/or wrongfully discharged solely based on their relationship to the discrimination complainant.

    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: