During that * months of service, there isn't any disciplinary action taken against me...although I did receive health benefits and had schedule an expensive surgery that would have required some time off... I was told that "I just wasn't working out"
I agree with Ms. Burley's response. Assuming you were an at-will employee, the employer is not required to discipline you, give you notice, or have "cause" to terminate you (although is it certainly good practice to do so). IF, however, they were aware of a medical issue you have, and you either qualify as "disabled" under the ADA or similar Ohio law or the employer "regarded" you as disabled, then you possibly could have a disability discrimination claim. It could also be unlawful under ERISA to take adverse action against you for the purpose of interfering with your benefits. It all depends on the employer's motivation, which can be hard to prove. Finally, I'll note that it is also unlawful to interfere with employees' rights under the FMLA, but that you would not qualify for FMLA protection because you were there for less than 12 months.See question
the jobs are ford motor company and the railroad also jb hunt. I 'm wondering if something in my past is haunting me. I know 32 years ago I had a theft charge but it was expunged. also some things in my juvenile record. I mean I don't know maybe ...
I generally agree with the other responses. Failure to hire claims are very difficult to establish. I have to say, though, that it strikes me as extremely unlikely that these prospective employers are pulling criminal histories going back 32 years, or would care about a nearly 30 year old WC case. Most don't go back more than 7 to 10 yrs, if that, plus you said it has been expunged. As far as credit histories, do you know if these prospective employers are even doing a credit check? (If they are, they are required to notify you first and get your permission, both in writing.) In any event, good luck with the job hunt.See question
are the legal fees deductable. Most of what I received was in compensatory damages.
I am not a tax expert, which is who you really need to consult with, but in general all "income" you receive is taxable, yes, except for compensation for *physical* injuries. Compensation for "emotional distress" generally would be taxable. In fact, your settlement agreement should have spelled this out, like X dollars of the settlement are deemed back wages and thus subject not only to income tax but also withholdings for Social Security, etc., and Y dollars are deemed compensatory for pain & suffering and thus not subject to employment taxes. You should get a W-2 reflecting the former and a 1099 reflecting the latter. As far as attorneys' fees, ideally those should have been paid directly to your counsel and thus not considered income to you, but if you received all the money and then paid Z dollars of it to your attorney, then yes, Z would be deductible from your income.See question
touching like rubbing on shoulders and arms
First, touching on the shoulders and/or arms is not going to constitute *sexual* assault because you are not being touched in a sexual area/manner. (Technically it could be battery, though, an unauthorized touching.) As far as sexual harassment, yes, it *could* be, but a great deal would depend on the overall context. To show a hostile environment, you'd have to present evidence that the harassment was severe or pervasive. Generally, a single incident is not going to rise to the level of sexual harassment unless it was extremely severe. But if this is an ongoing thing, you might have a case. But, as another commenter noted, you would have to prove that the conduct was unwelcome. So the very first thing you should do is tell the person, in polite but very clear and firm terms, to STOP touching you. If he/she proceeds, then you should immediately report the matter to your employer's HR person, because if the company doesn't know that the "harassment" is occurring, then it won't be liable for failing to stop it (unless the "harasser" is a supervisor). And if the person you report, or your employer, take any adverse action against you for reporting the matter, then you'd have a retaliation claim.See question
I am a bartender I work 2 days and 2 nights I receive shift pay tips from staff as well as my own tables for tips. I returned to work to find that one of my weekend days were given to another employee, all my taBLES were removed from my position a...
I agree with Mr. Nirenberg's answer; it depends on WHY your employer took the adverse employment actions that it did. As he said, IF it was *because* you have a disability, or the employer perceived you to have a disability, or your leave was FMLA protected and it was in retaliation for exercising your FMLA rights (or any similar rights under state law), then yes, you could have a claim. But if it was for other, legitimate business reasons, then no (unless you could prove those reasons were a pretext (cover) for a discriminatory motive. The timing of the adverse action does raise the possibility of retaliation, though.See question
My supervisor said they were looking for a veteran or a person of diversity to fill the position I worked the previous season. I filed a complaint and was offered a choice after a report of investigation. Either let the agency make a decision o...
You do not provide enough relevant facts, such as your age, gender, race, etc., and whether the Forest Service actually did go ahead and hire someone in a classification(s) different from yours, but if they did, then the fact that your supervisor gave you shifting reasons for the adverse employment decision (non-rehire) definitely supports the possibility of a claim. If, for example, you are a "non-diverse" white male, and they hired, e.g., a female minority, then you may have claims of race and gender discrimination. (You are correct, everyone, male, female, black, white, etc. is protected form employment discrimination BASED ON race, age, gender, etc.) And your supervisor's statement would be close to "direct evidence" of discrimination (if he was the one making the hiring decision). But even if not considered direct evidence, you'd have a circumstantial case, and would have the burden of showing that the employer's stated legitimate business reason ("performance") was a pretext for discrimination. Which is where the shifting reasons comes in. It's bare bones, but I'd say you have at least a decent start to a legitimate claim.See question
Was told my managment I wouldn't be the one trained for a higher position because a new hire used to be a manager for the company 6 years ago "cause it would be easier to train them instead of me"
On these facts alone, no. If the person selected is in a different protected classification (race, age, gender, disability, etc.) and you have information suggesting that the decision was influenced by such considerations, then you may have a claim. On its face, though, the employer has stated a legitimate business reason for its decision, so you would have to show that reason was merely a pretext to hide a discriminatory motive.See question
I returned from vacation today to discover a gift left on my desk.There was no name so I don't know who left it.I opened it up to find a larger sucker in the shape of male genitals. I asked my co-workers I am on a personal basis with,perphaps inte...
If you were offended by the "gift," then you did the right thing to report it. A single incident like this, however, without more (you don't mention any other incidents), is almost certainly not going to rise to the level of sexual harassment (or sex discrimination) under the law. As far as what the company "has" to do to investigate, if they determine that the conduct you reported on its face does not rise to the level of sexual harassment, they don't legally have to do anything. But they would be wise to follow their own sexual harassment policy guidelines (assuming they have them) and investigate the incident to head off any future incidents *before* such incidents could collectively rise to the level of sexual harassment.See question
I work for a private owned company in AZ. I was recently told because of slow revenue they can't pay me what I was hired at. I am the only employee who has to suffer this. I believe it is because I do not speak Spanish, and the other member of man...
Absent an employment contract (individual or union collective bargaining agreement), the general answer would be yes, your employer can change the terms and conditions of your employment, including your rate of pay, at any time (going forward; your employer cannot *retroactively* change your pay without running afoul of wage-hour laws). Nor can your employer take any adverse employment action (which would include a pay cut, obviously) against you *because of* age, race, sex, disability national original, etc., or to retaliate because you engaged in any protected activity (filed a complaint of discrimination, etc.) -- assuming that your employer is large enough to be covered by federal or AZ law. It is unclear from your question whether the ability to speak Spanish is a legitimate qualification for your job. IF it is not (which you seem to imply), it is possible that you might have a claim of race or national origin discrimination, although of course language abilities are not limited only to people of a certain race/ethnicity or country of origin. It would boil down to what your employer's true motivation was for the pay cut, financial issues (legitimate) or a protected trait such as national origin (unlawful).See question