Discrimination based on Mental Disability and Impairment

Having a disability is difficult enough for anyone and being discriminated at work because of one’s medical condition makes it even worse. Similarly, disability discrimination is also an unlawful practice that has corresponding penalty under the law.

Consequently, taking unlawful advantage of one’s medical disorder at work is prohibited by law. The federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) enumerate the medical conditions that qualify as disabilities, and hence, must not be used as basis to discriminate people.

These include the neurological disorder called Tourette syndrome. Tourette syndrome and other similar neurological conditions qualify as a disability under the law. As defined by the ADA, mental impairment means “any mental or psychological disorder such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, or specific learning disabilities”.

People with mental disability comprise a substantial part of the country’s population. In fact, nearly 4.56 million people are recognized as having mental retardation and developmental disabilities (MR/DD) and many of them are productively employed, thereby contributing to the nation’s economy.

If you experience discrimination because of your mental and medical condition, you can consult with an experienced discrimination lawyer in your area.

Plane crashed into home, killed three

An airplane accident happened recently in San Diego which claimed the lives of at least three people just this week.

Prior to the accident, an F/A-18D Hornet plane took off the Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier off the coast of San Diego with only one pilot on board. Reports said that the plane was having problems right after take off and the lone pilot prepared for an emergency landing.

The condition of the plane worsen while air borne prior to the landing, i.e. it lost its second engine, etc. As the consequence, the plane nosedived, according to witnesses – the pilot was able to eject himself from the aircraft in the nick of time.

Unluckily for San Diego neighborhood, the accident took place above them. The plane reportedly crashed into a home where a woman, her two kids, and an elderly woman lived. Due to the crash, three of them were confirmed killed.

The neighborhood was reportedly had to be evacuated. The pilot sustained injuries and was taken to the Naval Medical Center of San Diego.

Airplane or aviation accident doesn’t happen very often. But because of the dangerous nature of the plane’s fuel, it has a tendency to create a more fatal accident than others.

If you or anyone you know suffered injuries or wrongful death due to aviation accident, consult with an aviation accident or personal injury lawyer. You may have a valid claim against the party at fault or for whose negligence produces the accident.

Like this particular accident, the family of the victims may pursue a case for the loss of lives that happened because of the plane accident.

Expected Legislative Changes in Employment Law

Is it right to say that we lack laws when a situation does not favor us? Or do we simply lack implementation of existing laws that we feel the need to enact some more?

Whatever we say about new laws, we are about to see some major changes in the coming days as more legislative acts are expected to bring these changes to the present employment laws.

Some of these laws are mentioned in the article “More Political Predictions”, which was posted on October 31, 2008. According to the article, the next Congress is about to pass into law a set of employment laws that will eventually affect both employers and employees.

Among these laws, I believe three of them bear significance to of employees in relation to the present employment conditions.

For one, the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act is expected to complement the ADA and other state anti-discriminatory laws but will deal with the issue of sexual orientation and the more controversial, sexual identity.

Another law that will have impact on the workers and employees is the Arbitration Fairness Act, which would “ban requiring an employee to agree to resolve employment related claims by arbitration as a condition of employment”.

I believe this act will help improve the employees’ conditions, as it will eliminate binding arbitration as a means to avoid jury trials in many employment cases.

The Protecting America's Workers Act, another employment law that is deemed important, is expected to toughen Occupational Safety and Health Administration's whistleblower provisions. The law also increases the penalties, both civil and criminal, and expands the coverage to the public sector.

Now, the question on whether these proposed bills will be enacted into law or not will depend much on the next Congress who can be expected to take into consideration the present economic crisis, its impact on federal, state and local governments and the cost on employers when changes are finally implemented.

Workweek and Minimum Wage Compliance Definitions

Employers should be aware of what constitutes a workweek and minimum wage compliance as provided under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FSLA).

Workweek under the FSLA is defined as the “fixed and recurring period of 168 hours -seven consecutive 24-hour periods”. It may begin on any day and hour of the week and need not correspond with the calendar week.

Knowing the workweek is essential because it determines minimum wage compliance. Any time beyond the 168 hours shall be considered overtime hence, compensable.

Minimum wage compliance is an order that sets the minimum amount an employee should be paid in an hour.

Employees should receive compensation as set by the law. Any amount received by the latter below such standards would make the employer liable.

Guidelines on workweek and minimum wage compliance are vital. Employers would not have any reasons for not complying as they are mapped out by the law. Hence, liability may easily be pointed at the employer.

Employees should know their rights under the law. Various laws are enacted to protect their well-being. They just have to be vigilant and sue to vindicate their rights.

Non-Resident Employees are also Covered by California Wage Laws

The case of Sullivan v. Oracle Corporation and Oracle University, filed on 6 November 2008 and decided by the United States Court of Appeals, resolved that non-residents of California are under the coverage of the California Labor Laws for works performed within the state.

In this case, it appears that the plaintiffs were instructors who go to different states to train customers on the use of Oracle software. In California, the plaintiffs worked between nearly five and 30 days per year – the rest they work on other states.

On their complaint for overtime claims, among others, the instructors alleged that the respondent, Oracle, misclassified them into exempt employees and failed to pay them overtime, daily and/or weekly.

The Court said that the California wage and hour laws, including payment of overtime, apply to the plaintiffs during the days they worked in the state.

In California, overtime law mandates that employees who are not otherwise included in the list above, 18 years of age or older, or any minor employee 16 or 17 years of age who is not required by law to attend school and is not otherwise prohibited by law from engaging in the subject work, are entitled to overtime pay.

Meaning, they shall not be required to work beyond 8 hours in any workday or beyond 40 hours in any workweek unless they receive one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked over eight hours in any workday and over forty hours in the workweek.

Bicycle & Pedestrian Accidents on the Rise

The streets of San Francisco have seen the rise in the number of motorcycle and bicycles not only due to continuing rise of fuel prices and worsening economy, but in an effort to lessen the pollution and cleanse the air.

But corollary to that is the rise in pedestrian and bicycle accident which reported to have doubled since the last year. Authorities said that this does not mean that roads have become more dangerous but merely because of the increasing number of bicycles and motorcycle these days.

In 2006, vehicular accident fatalities in the US totaled to 42,642. Out of that number, pedestrian accident kills a staggering number of 4,784 individuals while nearly 70,000 pedestrians are injured.

Statistics show that at least 1 pedestrian gets killed in a traffic accident every 110 minutes, or so.

More and more people use motorcycle and bicycles to reduce the continuing micro economic burden that increasing fuel prices brought to American families.

In the State of California alone, the number of motorcycle licenses has reportedly increased – from 908,000 in 2002, the figure reached a staggering more than a million this year.

But as they say, everything has a price. As mentioned, due to increasing use of motorcycles and bicycles, the accidents in the streets involving them has exponentially increased as well. Cases of pedestrian accidents have noticeably increased too.

Pedestrian accidents are covered by tort laws which make negligent person liable for injury, damage or death of a pedestrian. Compensation may include medical bills, lost wages and property damages, as well as compensation for pain and suffering.

Equal Treatment to Pregnant Women

Women composed nearly half of the workforce today. When they become pregnant, they have the right to apply, be hired and continue working just like any body else. In fact, about 80% of American women become mothers.

The pregnancy discrimination act was enacted to safeguard the rights of pregnant women. It amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Act prohibits employers from employing discriminatory practices against women workers because of pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions.

However, problems continue to exist and to my surprise pregnancy discrimination comes from female dominated industries such as finance, real estate, retail services and insurance.

The law does not require employers to grant special treatment to pregnant women. It only requires that they be treated the same as that of other employees. Hence, if the employers give accommodation to non-pregnant employees, the same accommodation should also be granted to them.

Nevertheless, any favorable treatment by employers to pregnant women is not prohibited. The law only requires employers to make good their obligations under the Act.