As Halloween approaches, most of us expect a few harmless scares — maybe a jumpy horror movie or a haunted house. But for employees, there are far scarier things lurking in the workplace than ghosts and goblins. We’re talking about employer mistakes that can lead to legal nightmares — wage theft, discrimination, retaliation, and more.
It was October 31st, and the office halls were darkened with cobwebs, glowing jack-o’-lanterns, and a fog machine that hissed ominously in the corner. Spirits were high. Costumes were bold. Laughter echoed. Pranks abound. But what no one realized was that hidden beneath the masks and makeup lurked something far more sinister than ghosts or
Within employment law, the terms “hostile workplace” “harassment” and “hostile environment” often evoke images of a bully boss or inappropriate jokes. These types of situations are not uncommon. A majority of people can look at a past or current job that has created an environment that is intolerable. With
As employment lawyers, we often meet with potential clients who don’t quite understand the difference between plain English retaliation and the kind of retaliation that rises to the level of actionable retaliation.
There’s a good reason why people don’t know the difference. The plain English definition of retaliation
One of the elements of every retaliation claim is that there must be a “causal link” between the employee’s protected activity and the adverse action. In previous blogs I have talked about the standard for determining whether a materially adverse action has occurred. In this blog, I would like
Human Resources has called you into a meeting. At first, you are nervous. You wonder if someone caught you taking Carl’s lunch from the fridge or if all of those pens you accidentally put in your pocket are going to come back to haunt you. But
In order to make a viable retaliation claim, a plaintiff must generally have evidence of each element of a what is called a prima facie case. The phrase prima facie simply means “on first impression.” In the employment law context, a prima facie case means the basic elements of a claim that, if true, give rise to an inference of discrimination or retaliation. So for a retaliation claim, a plaintiff must usually show the following elements (1) that the plaintiff engaged in protected activity, (2) that the plaintiff suffered a materially adverse action, and (3) that a causal link exists between the protected activity and the adverse action. If facts establish each of those elements, then under the law, an inference of retaliation arises, which the defendant must then rebut by producing a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for the adverse action. The purpose of this post is to briefly discuss what is necessary to show that third all-important causal link element under Fifth Circuit law.
The first thing that needs to be made clear is what level of causation is necessary to show the causal link. The causal link standard is very low. According to the Fifth Circuit, all a plaintiff must show to establish a prima facie causal link is that the protected activity and the adverse action are “not wholly unrelated.” See Medina v. Ramsey Steel Co., 238 F.3d 674, 684 (5th Cir. 2001). So how do you do that?Continue Reading How do you show a causal link between an adverse action and protected activity in retaliation claims?
Hospital workers and employees of other patient care facilities have some of the most difficult jobs out there. The enormous amount of stress, pressure, and difficulty in performing these vital jobs has only been made worse this past year by the global pandemic that has swept across this nation. Given the huge amount of responsibility and the sheer importance of the jobs carried out by hospital workers, it is now more important than ever that COVID-19 safety procedures be followed. This is only possible if workers are allowed to freely report violations of COVID-19 safety procedures. Luckily, Texas law agrees. In this article I will discuss the very basics of the Texas Health and Safety Code and how it may be able to help you create a safer working environment.
Under the Texas Health and Safety Code, employees of hospitals, mental health facilities, and treatment facilities are protected from retaliation by their employers if they make a report of a violation of law, which includes a violation of the code itself, a rule adopted by the code, or a rule of another agency. Moreover, if a time gap of less than 60 days is between when the report is made and an adverse action, which can be a termination, suspension, or a demotion, takes place, the law states that there is a rebuttable presumption that the adverse action took place because of the report.Continue Reading The Texas Health and Safety Code: An Often Forgotten Tool in Helping Texas Workers
Even if you’ve never seen the TV show or read any of the books about Perry Mason, criminal defense attorney extraordinaire, you know the moment I’m talking about. It happens at the end each episode or book. Perry Mason is representing an innocent man or woman, but things are not looking good. The District Attorney, Hamilton Burger is on the attack, presenting one damning piece of evidence after another. But then Perry calls one more witness or recalls a witness from earlier in the trial and everything changes. Under withering cross-examination, Perry breaks down the witness by pointing out inconsistencies, falsehoods, and ulterior motives. By the end, the witness is a reduced to a quivering mass of raw nerves. And then the witness confesses! Or points to the real guilty party sitting in the back row of the courtroom. The charges against Perry’s client are quickly dropped and Perry Mason once again emerges victorious.
Continue Reading The Case of the Missing Perry Mason Moment
On August 27, 2020, the Fifth Court of Appeals of Texas at Dallas reversed the dismissal of Fernando Herrera’s Texas Whistleblower case against Dallas Independent School District. In doing so, it ordered the case back to the trial court for further proceedings.
The lawsuit alleges DISD terminated Mr. Herrera because he complained to Child Protective Services (“CPS”) about suspected child abuse by other DISD teachers. The lawsuit was initially filed in June 2018 in Dallas District Court.
The lawsuit states Mr. Herrera made two reports to CPS. The first report was made on or about March 31, 2017 after Mr. Herrera witnessed a DISD teacher inappropriately touching a student in front of several other teachers. The second report was made on May 16, 2017 after a concerned parent informed Mr. Herrera she suspected a teacher inappropriately touched a student. On May 17, 2017, DISD put Mr. Herrera on administrative leave.Continue Reading Recent Texas Whistleblower Act Decision from the Dallas Court of Appeals
