DOL Settles FMLA Charge Against Staples (Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Jun 08, 2015)


www.edelsteinpayne.com/employment-law

DOL Settles FMLA Charge Against Staples


Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Jun 08, 2015  (0 Comments)
The Family and Medical Leave Act requires that employers inform employees of available relief. Generally, an employer is covered by the FMLA if it is a private employer with 50 or more employees, a public agency, or a public or private elementary or secondary school. The FMLA provides, among other things, 12 weeks of job-protected unpaid leave for workers who must miss work for an illness, the illness of a family member (more FMLA info here). All covered employers must have a general notice about the FMLA posted,  must provide employees general notice about the FMLA, notify workers of their eligibility status and rights and responsibilities, and notify employees whether specific leave is designated as FMLA leave and how much time will be used against their FMLA leave entitlement. 
A worker's eligibility is determined and notice of elibility status must be provided the first time the worker takes leave for a FMLA-qualifying reason in the employer's designated 12-month leave year. This notice can be verbal or written and must be provided within 5 business days of the initial request for leave or when the employer knows that the leave may be for an FMLA-qualifying reason, must inform the workers of their eligibility status, and if the worker is determined to not be eligible, must state the reason why not.
Recently the Department of labor settled a case against office supply retail giant Staples for failing to inform a worker of his rights when he informed them he would need to take time to care for his ailing wife. For two years, the worker used personal, sick, and vacation days, and worked remotely to balance his need to care for his wife with his work obligations. Then Staples fired him. 
Following a Department of Labor investigation, the agency filed a lawsuit against Staples for violating the FMLA in failing to inform the worker of his rights. Part of the settlement includes an agreement that Staples will promote a company wide policy for compliance with the FMLA; the worker also received $137,500 in lost wages and an equal amount in liquidated damages. 
The North Carolina employment law-firm Edelstein & Payne only represents workers. We have experience litigating Family and Medical Leave Act issues, including cases where workers have been retaliated against for exercising their rights under the law. If you believe that you have been mistreated or left in the dark regarding your rights under the FMLA, contact us to schedule a consultation via our web form www.edelsteinpayne.com/employment-law
___________________________
If you, a co-worker, friend, neighbor, family member, or a loved one was injured on the job, please know we're here to help.  We provide complimentary case evaluations for workplace accidents any where in the state of North Carolina

For Valuable Tips, Join us, Follow and Subscribe to Edelstein Payne:

Facebook:

Twitter:

Google+

Youtube:

Blogger:

Google Places:

Instagram:

Linkedin:

Pinterest:

Tumblr:

Yelp:

YP.com:
Location: 315 E Jones St, Raleigh, NC 27601, USA

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Home Healthcare Workers are Entitled to Overtime Pay (Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Jul 06, 2016)

Image
https://edelsteinpayne.com/employment-law Home Healthcare Workers are Entitled to Overtime Pay Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Jul 06, 2016 (0 Comments) Long the subject of a terribly unfair rule that exempted them from such standard employment rights as overtime and minimum wage, home healthcare workers are among the worst treated of American workers. Home Healthcare workers hired through a third-party staffing agency have been exempted from those rules since 1974! The Obama administration attempted to remedy this injustice in 2013, and the result has been tied up in courts until last week, when the United States Supreme Court ruled that they would not hear further appeal (the administration's rulemaking prevailed in the court of appeals) effectively ratifying the rule. Home healthcare workers, including, nurses, certified nursing assistants, physical therapists, and others who provide services to the elderly and infirm to help keep them out of nursing homes, provid...
Read more

Felony Larceny by Removing Anti-Shoplifting Device (Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Feb 12, 2016)

Image
https://edelsteinpayne.com/criminal-defense Felony Larceny by Removing Anti-Shoplifting Device Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Feb 12, 2016 (0 Comments) As I am still fairly new to the North Carolina Bar and the practice of criminal defense here in NC, I was surprised to recently be in a consultation with an individual whose petty shoplifting allegation was charged as a felony because of the additional allegation that he had removed a security device.  Shoplifting in North Carolina can be charged as a felony if the value of the goods stolen exceeds $1,000.00. It can also be a felony in some other circumstances, including if the person has four or more prior convictions for larceny.  Under North Carolina General Statute Sect. 14-72.11(2), a person is guilty of a Class H felony if the person commits larceny against a merchant "by removing, destroying, or deactivating a component of an antishoplifting or inventory control device  to prevent the activation of a...
Read more

NC Court of Appeals Confirms No Duty to Retreat Prior to Self-Defense (Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Jun 07, 2017)

Image
https://edelsteinpayne.com/criminal-defense NC Court of Appeals Confirms No Duty to Retreat Prior to Self-Defense Originally Posted by Sean Cecil Jun 07, 2017 (0 Comments) North Carolina law does not require retreat before use of self-defense. "Perfect" self-defense is a defense against criminal charges; "imperfect" may be used as a mitigating factor in sentencing. Perfect self-defense requires all four of the following elements: (1) It appeared to defendant and he believed it to be necessary to use force to save himself from harm;  (2) Defendant's belief was reasonable in that the circumstances as they appeared to him at the time were sufficient to create such a belief in the mind of a person of ordinary firmness; (3) Defendant was not the aggressor in bringing on the affray, i.e., he did not aggressively and willingly enter into the fight without legal excuse or provocation; and (4) Defendant did not use excessive force.  Imperfect sel...
Read more