COVID-19 Update: How We Are Serving and Protecting Our Clients. Click for More Information.

Articles Posted in Uncategorized

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the federal agency charged with investigating and regulating workplace discrimination. Before filing a lawsuit in court, employees must first file a charge with the EEOC. Each year, the EEOC tracks the cases filed by charge type, meaning the type of the discrimination the employee is alleging. The EEOC has published its 2020 employment discrimination statistics. Today’s Long Island employment law blog takes a closer look at the numbers, and in particular, we take a look at what’s happening in New York.

Overall, across the entire country and the EEOC’s jurisdiction, 67,448 charges were filed. Later, we’ll discuss that there may be factors to consider other than less employees are filing charges, but 2020 marks the fourth straight year of declining charges, and nearly a decade of an overall average decrease in total filings.

New York is following the national trend. In 2020, 2,999 charges were filed, down from 3,220 the year before. This is also the fourth year of declines. The following chart shows that, with the exception of a few upward ticks, the trend has generally been less and less filings since the reporting started in 2009.

Long Island employment lawyers, Peter Famighetti and Matthew Weinick, partners of the employment law firm Famighetti & Weinick PLLC, have been selected to the 2020 New York Metro Super Lawyers list. No more than 5% of the lawyers in New York State are selected by the Super Lawyer’s research team to receive this honor.

Super Lawyers evaluates lawyers in the state who they find have reached a “high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement.” The rating service then selects lawyers using a patented process, including surveying lawyers within the state, and independently researching evaluation of candidates and peer reviews.

2020 marks the fifth consecutive year that Famighetti has been selected for the Super Lawyers list. On his selection, Famighetti commented that, “I am so appreciative to be included on the Super Lawyers list, alongside some of the most respected lawyers in the state.” Famighetti further noted that, “I believe that both partners’ selection shows the Firm’s commitment to excellence in the practice of law.”

Long Island employment lawyer, Matthew Weinick, has been selected to chair the Nassau County Bar Association’s Labor and Employment Law Committee. Founded in 1899 with just nineteen members, the Nassau County Bar Association now boasts nearly 5,000 members.

The Labor and Employment Law committee is tasked with analyzing proposals for new federal and state legislation and regulations relating to employment issues such as employer-employee relations, benefits, and pensions. The committee also reviews judicial decisions concerning employment law matters including discrimination, retaliation, and wage and hour issues.

The committee meets once per month at the association’s Mineola office building, affectionately known by members as “Domus.” Meetings provide committee members the opportunity to discuss the latest developments in employment law. The committee invites a speaker to each meeting, to lead a discussion with members about a particular area of employment law.

El 18 de Marzo de 2020, el presidente Trump promulgó La Ley de Primera Respuesta al Coronavirus de las Familias. La ley establece, entre otras cosas, licencias para empleados relacionados con el coronavirus y entrará en vigencia 15 días a partir del 18 de Marzo. La ley proporciona licencia por enfermedad de emergencia, licencia familiar de emergencia y créditos fiscales. Al igual que la ley de Nueva York sobre la que escribimos en el blog a principios de esta semana, la aplicación de la ley varía según el tamaño del empleador. Los detalles de la ley se analizan a continuación.

La Ley de Primera Respuesta al Coronavirus de las Familias requiere que ciertos empleadores proporcionen a sus empleados licencia remunerada por enfermedad o familia por razones específicas relacionadas con COVID-19. [1] La División de Salarios y Horas del Departamento de Trabajo administra y aplica los requisitos de licencia pagada de la nueva ley. Estas disposiciones se aplicarán desde la fecha de entrada en vigor hasta el 31 de diciembre de 2020.

Aucensia  Por  Enfermedad 

En estos tiempos inciertos, los Neoyorquinos están luchando por encontrar consuelo siempre que sea posible. En el contexto del empleo, los empleados se han enfrentado a preguntas sobre la seguridad laboral, la seguridad de los ingresos y cómo equilibrar las instrucciones para quedarse en casa del gobierno y los intentos de los empleadores de mantener sus negocios en funcionamiento.

El 18 de Marzo del 2020, la ley fue firmada por el gobernador de Nueva York, Andrew Cuomo, promulgaría leyes para otorgar licencias y licencias por enfermedad pagadas por ausencias laborales relacionadas con el coronavirus. El blog de derecho laboral de Long Island de hoy discute las disposiciones de la ley.

Empleados sujetos a cuarantena mandatoria o cuarentena precaucinarias ordenado por el Estata de Nueva York , Departamento de Salud o culaquier entidad gubernamental debidamente authorizada para emitar dicha orden, tendra derecho a licencia por enfermedada pagada de la siguente manera:

Long Island employment lawyers Famighetti & Weinick PLLC have started a new “Lockdown Video series.”  The series will address emerging employment law issues created because of the Covid-19 / coronavirus epidemic. As videos become available, they will be posted to this blog.

Episode 1: Must Healthcare Workers Report to Work if not Given Protective Equipment?

On March 18, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.  The law provides for, among other things, leave for employees related to the coronavirus and becomes effective 15 days from March 18.  The act provides emergency sick leave, emergency family leave, and tax credits. Like the New York law we blogged about earlier this week, the law’s application varies depending on employer size.  The specifics of the law are discussed below.

Sick Leave

The law provides for paid sick leave for some employees.  Preliminarily, this portion of the law applies only to employers with less than 500 employees.  As to employers who meet this number requirement, employees may qualify for paid sick leave if they meet any of these requirements:

Better late than never. Long Island employment law firm Famighetti & Weinick PLLC is excited to announce the addition of team member, Elisa. Elisa joins the firm as our paralegal. Although we’re approaching Elisa’s one year anniversary, we’ve all been so busy that we weren’t able to write an official welcome blog, until today.

Elisa’s value to the firm and to our clients is self-evident. Before her hire, Elisa studied criminal justice at Excelsior College. Her coursework included instruction about the United States court system, immigration, juvenile justice, criminal law, and ethics, coursework which aligns with the firm’s values of providing legal services to vulnerable segments of the population.

Elisa also received her paralegal studies certificate from Hofstra University. At Hofstra, Elisa learned skills which she puts to work everyday, including research and writing, and civil litigation procedures. Her substantive law classes included contracts, real estate, family law, business organizations, and Wills, Trusts, and Estates.

Courts can only hear cases over which they have jurisdiction. For example, a family court could hear a divorce case, but not a breach of contract case. A surrogate’s court in New York can probate a will, but it cannot award damages in a personal injury case. Today’s Long Island employment law blog discusses the jurisdiction of federal courts and a recent appeal’s court decision relating to jurisdiction.

A court’s jurisdiction is generally considered either general or specific. In New York, the Supreme Court (which is actually the lowest level court) is generally a court of general jurisdiction. This means Supreme Courts can hear nearly any type of case. For purposes of efficiency however, the state created other courts of specific jurisdiction. As noted above, family courts, surrogate’s courts, and small claims courts were created to hear specific types of cases so that the Supreme Court can hear other matters without its docket being clogged.

Federal courts are, by the very nature of the Constitution, courts of limited jurisdiction. Since the federal government only has the power to regulate those areas granted by the Constitution and all other areas of regulation and lawmaking are reserved to the states, federal courts cannot hear all types of cases. Generally, federal courts can hear cases in one of two ways, either by diversity jurisdiction or federal question jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction exists when the parties live in different states. For example, if Jim lives in New York and Joe lives in New Jersey and Jim was injured in a car accident with Joe, Jim could sue Joe in a federal court. But, if Jim and Joe both live in New York, Jim would have to sue Joe in a New York State Supreme Court.

When two legal rights collide, how does the court pick a side? The United States Supreme Court’s ruling on June 4, 2018, in Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, made it clear that it is not an easy decision. Today’s Long Island civil rights blog discusses whether a baker can rightfully turn down a gay couple’s request to design their wedding cake if the baker’s religion does not accept gay marriage.

Freedom of speech and religion are two important civil liberties protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Freedom of speech extends to both traditional verbal speech, and expressive conduct also known as symbolic speech. Burning a flag and wearing a t-shirt opposing a political leader are two examples of symbolic speech.

Conduct remains at the heart of symbolic speech claims. Thoughts, ideas, and opinions are powerful and courts have decided to protect them in certain scenarios. However, the conduct’s offensiveness or irrationality can never be taken into consideration when deciding whether or not the conduct deserves First Amendment protection.

Contact Information