Florida Employment Lawyer Blog

According to a newly filed lawsuit, the federal air marshals that protect against terrorist acts in the sky are subject to a racially insensitive and hostile work environment. There are over 3,000 federal air marshals but apparently the friendly skies are not as friendly as you might think. Many air marshals - including several based in Miami and Orlando - are claiming to have been the victim of employment discrimination and of being forced to work in a hostile environment.

One would think that the federal government does a fantastic job at preventing workplace disrimination, but all too often government officials and agencies look the other way and allow a hostile environment to foster and linger. Most federal anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws protect government and public-section employees just as strongly as they protect private employees. If you work for the State of Florida, a municipality within Florida, or a federal agency, it is imperitive that you contact an experienced employment attorney as soon as possible, and preferably while you remain employed.

Although the major federal employment discrimination statute, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and the major Florida employment discrimination statute, the Florida Civil Rights Act, do not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, both state and federal law prohibit discrimination on the basis of a person's HIV status.

HIV positive Floridians are protected under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. In a landmark settlement, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission settled an HIV discrimination lawsuit against Cirque de Soleil for a staggering $600,000.

Two state laws also protect HIV positive Floridians. First, the Florida Civil Rights Act contains the same disability discrimination prohibitions as the federal Americans with Disabiltiies Act, and thus HIV status is a qualifying disability under state law. Second, Florida has a specific HIV status disrimination statute, section 760.50 of the Florida Statutes, that prohibits discrimination in employment, housing and public accomodations based upon a person's HIV status, and importantly, the perception of a person's HIV status. Thus, an employee (gay or not) fired because the employer suspects or fears that the employee is HIV positive, even when the employee is not HIV positive, is still protected under Florida law.

These are sensitive matters and it is important that you confidentially consult an experienced HIV discrimination employment attorney as soon as you suspect the discrimination. If you wait, it may be too late.

The Family and Medical Leave Act gives certain employees the right to take up to twelve weeks of unpaid leave to care for a new baby, to fight a serious medical condition or to care for a dependant family member. It was President Clinton's very first piece of legislation and is considered groundbreaking for its acknowledgment that many families are one medical condition away from bankruptcy and that women, more so than men, are subtly punished for having a child. But unlike most employment statutes that require intentional misconduct by the employer, the FMLA is a "strict liability" statute. The company has an affirmative obligation to compy with the FMLA, and when it fails to do so, even unintentionally, it could face serious monetary penalties.

The biggest problem area facing both employees and employers is the "right to return to work" provision. Employers must return a person on FMLA leave to the same or equivalent position, except in the rare circumstance where the position is no longer available due to reasons "wholly unrelated" to the FMLA leave. Two recent cases filed in federal court in Miami highlight the potential danger for employers. First, in Marks v. Orion Medical Enterprises, the employee was denied reinstatement after taking FMLA leave, purportedly because the employee was not physically capable of returning to work. (In the interest of full disclosure, the case against Orion was brought by the author of this blog). Second, in Guzman v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, the employee was returned to work after taking FMLA leave, but according to the complaint, the employee's temporary replacement assumed the employee's responsibiltiies and the employee who took leave was essentially shunned by the company upon returning to work.

It is common for employers to use an employee's FMLA leave to try out new or temporary employees or to "shake things up." But this is illegal and it frequently gets employers in trouble. Even if the employer did not intend to discriminate against the employee who took FMLA, the company is still violating the FMLA by failing to reinstatement the employee to the same or equivalent position.

If you are contemplating taking FMLA leave, you should contact an experienced FMLA employment attorney before you take leave to make sure that your rights are protected ahead of time.

What do you do when the company you work for is defrauding the government? Perhaps the call the FBI, perhaps call the local police. But more and more employees are first turning to experienced false claims employment attorneys to represent them in lawsuits against the employer "on behalf of" the state or federal government.

One recent example is the Justice Department's lawsuit against drug giant Johnson & Johnson. According to the complaint, J&J violated the Medicare Act by encouraging doctors to prescribe medication that was not medically necessary, but that would be paid by the taxpapers through Medicare. Doctors have a moral and legal obligation to prescribe medication that is in the best interest of their patients. But according to the complaint, doctors were paid money to over-prescribe unneccessary medication. The bills, submitted by doctors and hospitals on behalf of medicare patients, were paid by the state. The bills submitted to the state, better known as "claims," were fraudulent because they were based on a fraud. And J&J apparently was the master agent behind the entire scheme.

This kind of fraud is quite common and hard to detect because doctors are generally given substantial leeway in prescribing medication. But medicare fraud is rampant, and South Florida is a major hot bed for medicare fraud.

Employees who blow the whistle on fraud on the government are potentially rewarded with a lucrative percentage of the government's recovery, and of course there's the personal satisfaction with doing your part to make sure that the American taxpayers are not being cheated. But these claims are difficult to prove and that is why you should speak confidentially to an experienced whistleblower lawyer as soon as you suspect the fraud. If you wait until you're fired or you resign, it could be too late.

The Fair Labor Standards Act mandates that all employees be paid time and half for all time worked in excess of 40 hours in any given work week. The Act exempts only a small class of employees, commonly referred to as managers or supervisors. But the title "manager" or "supervisor" has no legal significance, nor does being "salaried." The law considers what employees actually do on a daily basis -- not what the company claims they do. Many companies - ranging from small businesses to large publically traded companies - routinely misclassify their employees and wrongfully deny them the overtime compensation they are legally entitled to receive.

According to a new lawsuit filed in federal court in Atlanta, telecom giant AT&T is one such company. Apparently their first tier managers are not paid any overtime, even though their job duties are not actually "managerial." This is a fact intensive question and AT&T, which is facing millions of dollars in damages, will no doubt spare no expense defending this lawsuit. Employees of all levels should consult with an experienced overtime compensation employment attorney to get educated.

For years the federal courts have disagreed over what amount of bad, rude, sexist and raunchy langauge is required for someone to bring sexual harassment lawsuit. But a recent opinion by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals provided much needed guidance on the topic and made it clear that using words such as "bitch," "whore" and "cunt" in the workplace are unacceptable. Too many women have been denied their day in court because some judges have concluded that a certain amount of foul language is just part of the workday. Conduct that was accepted and tolerated twenty or thirty years ago is no longer acceptable and women have the right raise these issues with the employer and, if necessary, file suit to enforce and vindicate those rights.

In Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, a female employee - who previously served in the U.S. Merchant Marines and was no stranger to sexist jokes and language - was forced to listen to her male co-workers degrade her and other women in the workplace for years. When she complained to management she was blown off and no corrective action was taken. After filing suit, the trial judge dismissed the lawsuit because he concluded that the daily verbal abuse and degradation she suffered was not sufficient to constitute sexual harassment. But the Court of Appeals strongly disagreed and issued a well-reasoned and detailed opinion reversing the dismissal and allowing the cas to proceed to trial. What makes the decision so important is that, despite being considered a very conservative court, not a single judge dissented or disagreed in any way with the reversal.

This case stresses the importance of having a zero tolerance policy when it comes to sexist language and conduct, and the importance of consulting with an experienced sexual harassment employment attorney as early as possible.