First and foremost, climate change is real. Temperatures are more extreme and extreme weather events are more common. As a result, workers who work outside are at a greater risk of illness, injury, and even death from heat exposure than ever before. Still, the Occupational
We asked Julie L. St. John, an experienced Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Rob Wiley, P.C., to impart her candid answers to a range of questions. After reading, you will be more more informed on the well-respected reputation that Ms. St. John carries.
1. Why did you start practicing labor and employment law?
Because I care about the rights of employees and believe all workers should be treated fairly.
2. If you could write a new law, what would it do?
Guarantee a living wage for all workers.
3. Besides Rob Wiley, P.C., what is the most interesting job that you have had?
I worked as the beer cart girl at a golf course in college.
4. What’s the best part of living in Houston?
Houston is clearly the best city in Texas, way better than Austin or Dallas. The people are wonderful, and the food is delicious. The only downside is the traffic, which is why I refuse to go outside of the loop (with a key exception for Ikea).
5. If you were not practicing labor and employment law what would you be?
I would start a gardening/landscaping company with animals that do the work. The goats would eat the weeds, the pigs would till the ground, and the chickens would keep the bugs away.
6. Why did you decide to become a lawyer?
To have another tool to use to fight for things I believe in. I’ve always wanted to change the world.
7. What do you do when you’re not practicing law?
Travel, watch Ohio State football, and work to make my cat instafamous.
8. What’s your favorite legal movie
The Pelican Brief because it features Tulane Law!
9. Have you ever learned something from one of your clients?
I learn something from almost all of my clients. Most importantly, courage.
10. Who do you most admire as a lawyer?
Julie L. St. John is a Trial Attorney in the Houston office of Rob Wiley, P.C. She graduated from Ohio State University with her bachelor’s degree in 2007. Ms. St. John then graduated from Tulane University School of Law in 2017.
Your employer has just fired you for an illegal reason. What do you do next? Your next step is probably contacting an employment lawyer. Indeed, it probably should be. Then let’s say you hire an employment lawyer who tells you you have a really strong…
May is mental health awareness month. It is designated as such to bring awareness to the importance of mental health and to de-stigmatize mental illness. As an employment lawyer, I believe this effort is of the upmost importance.
Mental health should not be looked at any differently than…
The federal government is at a risk of fraud because of contracts it makes with and resources it provides to private companies. For example, the federal government contracts with private construction companies to work on federally funded development projects. Another example is money paid to private health care providers as a result of Medicare and…
The world has been watching the past few weeks as GameStop stock caused chaos in the financial market, resulting in incredibly wealthy institutional investors losing billions. What media outlets have described as a modern-day David vs. Goliath story has captivated many, including me. This story of individual traders uniting and working together to take on the wealthy elite who tend to control the markets is a perfect illustration of the power of the masses to make change. Perhaps this story will inspire the many to work together in other contexts as well, such as in the workplace.
What happened with GameStop
First off, I do not claim to be any sort of expert on financial markets, and if you really want to get a thorough understanding of what exactly went down with GameStop there are a lot of good resources out there. That being said, the simple, non-technical version is that some individual traders realized how many hedge funds and other institutional investors were shorting GameStop stock and decided to use it to their advantage by rallying the masses primarily via a Reddit forum.
With the new year brings new changes to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Some of those changes, those to TRCP Rule 169 which creates and governs the process for expedited actions in Texas, are quite significant and could potentially result in an increased number of lawsuits being filed under the Rule.
Expedited actions under TRCP Rule 169 are essentially lawsuits that meet certain criteria and have special procedures and limitations. These procedures and limitations in turn allow for expedited actins to be fast-tracked to trial, hence the name. Indeed, expedited actions exist to “promote the prompt, efficient, and cost-effective resolution” of lawsuits that do not exceed a certain monetary value and do not seek any non-monetary relief. The key change to Rule 169 is what that monetary value is and, accordingly, what lawsuits can be brought as expedited actions.
When I meet a potential new client for the first time, one of the things I always ask is what their goal is. One of the answers I often get is that they want someone to tell their story. However, I do not view telling a client’s story as a goal. I see it as a tool that can be used to achieve a goal. And social science research on persuasion has valuable lessons for how a client telling their own story can be quite a powerful tool indeed.
Hearing a story from the right messenger can be particularly compelling.
Social science research shows that storytelling is one of the most effective methods of persuasion. Ultimately, as lawyers, we are constantly trying to persuade. Accordingly, we must not only know and argue the law, we must be able to tell our clients’ stories in an effective way.
Moreover, research shows that it is not only the story that matters, it is also the messenger. Although sometimes I may be the appropriate messenger, oftentimes my clients are the most effective messengers of all. Therefore, as an advocate for employees, I not only tell my clients’ stories, I also help my clients get comfortable with telling their own stories.
When subjected to harassment or discrimination at work, different people respond in different ways. Under certain circumstances, some employees feel they have no other choice than to resign. Unfortunately, it can be very difficult for those who do so to then bring a successful claim against their former employer for lost wages. To recover actual damages for lost wages, an employee who quits as opposed to being fired must argue they were constructively discharged – the legal term for forced to resign.
Obviously, if your employer tells you to quit or be fired, constructive discharge would apply. However, such a clear ultimatum is not often the case. More common is when an employee finds themself in a situation where they are being subjected to harassment or discrimination and can simply take no more. Often, these workers have already complained to management or human resources and nothing has been done. Indeed, it may even be that the employer is trying to get the employee to quit.
In a previous blog post I wrote about arbitration. As a reminder, arbitration is essentially an alternative venue to litigate claims – a private venue companies are often willing to pay a lot for because it keeps disputes out of the public record and tends to be more favorable to employers. In this blog I will talk about how some companies go even further by requiring employees to not only agree to arbitration, but to agree to an entire alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process/procedure.
We have a lot of potential clients come to us because they are working in what they consider to be a hostile work environment. Their boss yells at them, belittles them, intimidates them, mocks them, etc. Sometimes this treatment is constant. Sometimes this treatment is intermittent but extreme. But generally speaking, these are not petty slights or simple annoyances; it is something more. Overall, these employees are working in an environment a reasonable employee would consider hostile, intimidating, or abusive.
Common sense would dictate that an employer should not be allowed to subject its employees to such treatment. However, unfortunately, there is no federal or Texas law that broadly protects employees from a hostile work environment.