Matt graduated cum laude from Hofstra Law School. While at Hofstra, Matt served as notes and comments editor of the Hofstra Labor and Employment Law Journal, which also published his article about workers’ rights. Matt interned for United States District Judge Denis R. Hurley while in law school.

After graduating from law school, Matt worked for the Nassau County Attorney’s Office where he was assigned to the General Litigation Bureau, handling employment law matters as well as “Constitutional torts” in which Matt defended Nassau County employees such as police officers and corrections officers, in lawsuits alleging violations of citizens’ Constitutional rights. Among the high profile cases Matt worked on was a lawsuit alleging the police department’s use of mounted police was unconstitutional and another case alleging Nassau County’s decision to post pictures of individuals arrested for DWI was unconstitutional.

In 2010, Matt entered private practice and worked for a highly regarded employment litigation firm on Long Island. Matt represented employees alleging claims of employment discrimination and retaliation. Matt also worked on other complex matters handled by the firm. For example, Matt represented a party in a litigation arising from the investment in and subsequent bankruptcy of a large Las Vegas casino/hotel, he defended the owner of an automobile dealership in a lawsuit contesting ownership of the dealership, and he represented the beneficiary of the estate of the “godfather of rap” in a dispute related to the administration of the estate.

In 2013, Matt joined with Long Island employment lawyer Peter J. Famighetti to open Famighetti & Weinick, PLLC. At F&W, Matt continues to fight for workplace rights by bringing claims against employers for workplace discrimination, sexual harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation. Matt also represents business owners and successfully defeated a limousine drivers’ attempts to bring a class action lawsuit for allegedly unpaid tips and overtime against a limousine company.

Matt routinely appears in the federal and state courts of New York at both the trial and appellate levels. Among his achievements, he won a plaintiff’s jury verdict for $150,00 in emotional damages in a First Amendment political association case, he won $100,00 in damages after a hearing on his client’s defamation case, and he obtained a judgment for more than $350,000 for his client who was not paid the proper minimum wage and overtime. His cases have received attention from the press and he has been interviewed by newspapers such as Newsday, the New York Post, and the New York Daily News.

Matt’s work has been commended by judges, attorney review websites and magazines, and clients. For instance, Matt received a 10.0 rating from attorney review website AVVO, he has been listed as a Rising Star in Super Lawyers Metro Magazine for 6 straight years, and a United States Magistrate Judge described Matt as “an experienced attorney . . . primarily in employment litigation” and noted his court submissions were “detailed, thorough, and accurate.” About her experience with Matt, former client “Sara” said “Matt Weinick is an excellent attorney. With his assistance I was able to get exonerated from false allegations against me.”

Additionally, Matt is devoted to the Long Island legal community. He is the secretary of the Nassau County Bar Association’s Labor and Employment Law committee, he has published multiple articles about employment law in the Bar Association’s newspaper, he has given Continuing Legal Education classes on employment law and led other discussions about civil rights laws, and he is a Guest Lecturer at Hofstra Law School where for three years, he has taught the Foundational Lawyering Skills class to second year students.

On the personal side, Matt is an avid SCUBA diver and he has dove in exotic locations such as the meso-American reef system in Mexico and the Catalina Islands in Costa Rica. Matt also loves music and plays guitar and when not in the office, Matt can often be found practicing playing. For nearly 24 years, Matt has volunteered in his community as an Emergency Medical Technician and/or Firefighter.

If you would like to speak to Long Island employment lawyer Matthew Weinick, he can be reached by phone at 631-352-0050 x 100, by email at mbw@fwlawpllc.com, or by text message at 631-629-2102. His website profile is available at https://www.linycemploymentlaw.com/matthew-weinick.

The following facts are taken from Fernandez v. Zoni Language Ctrs., Inc. decided by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on May 26, 2017. The plaintiffs were English Language instructors at a private, for-profit institution offering English classes to adult students. The teachers argued that their employer, Zoni Centers, was required to pay them minimum wage for hours worked outside of the classroom, such as when preparing for class and grading work, and overtime hours when their classroom and out-of-classroom work exceeded forty hours per week. The District Court held that although employers are generally required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) to pay employees minimum wage and overtime, teachers are considered bona fide professionals exempt from these FLSA requirements. Thus, Zoni Centers was not required to abide by the general FLSA requirements.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR REGULATIONS

The issue in the case was whether Zoni Centers was considered an “educational establishment” as required by the Department of Labor’s regulation. If they were, then the FLSA exemption applied and if not, the exemption did not apply and the teachers would win. Although the teachers tried to argue that Zoni Centers was not an “educational establishment,” the Second Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. The teachers here argued that Zoni Centers should not be considered an “educational establishment” because: (1) instructors hired by Zoni Centers did not have to possess a teaching certificate, have majored in a field related to English, or even have bachelor’s degrees; and (2) the students did not earn a certificate like students at primary schools, secondary schools, or even colleges. In striking down the teachers’ arguments, the Second Circuit considered both the plain meaning of the word “educational” and the fact that the regulation did not have a clear definition of what an “other educational institution” meant. The Court thought this vagueness suggested that the meaning was broad and flexible. Therefore, the Second Circuit held that Zoni Centers was an “educational establishment” because they conveyed knowledge to its students and possessed a state licensure and national accreditation. Furthermore, in deciding to agree with the lower court, the Second Circuit concluded that although the eight factors the District Court used to determine whether the exemption applies were helpful, they were not definitive. The eight factors were: (1) the title of employees; (2) the certifications required of employees; (3) the formality of courses; (4) the granting of certificates or degrees; (5) the institution’s charter; (6) the employee’s involvement in organizing, communicating and delivering curriculum; (7) whether the institution is licensed by a state agency responsible for the state’s educational system; and (8) whether the institution is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting organization. In other words, the Second Circuit decided not to adopt a strict test to determine who qualified under the bona fide professional exemption applicable to teachers. In sum, a teacher at a private institution that is not considered either a primary school, secondary school, college, or any of its counterparts, may not be entitled to minimum wage for hours worked outside of the classroom or overtime hours when their classroom and out-of-classroom work exceeds forty hours per week.

Since it may not always be clear who falls under the FLSA exemption for bona fide professionals, if you have further questions about unpaid minimum wage or overtime contact the employment lawyers on Long Island of Famighetti & Weinick, PLLC at 631-352-0050.

Today’s Long Island employment law blog was written by Thalia Olaya, a Hofstra Law School intern working at Famighetti & Weinick, PLLC, this summer.

The facts below are taken from the cases Griffin v. Sirva, Inc. decided by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the New York Court of Appeals.

Griffin v. Sirva

The employees in Griffin worked for Astro Moving and Storage, which provided moving and storage services for Allied Van Lines. Allied is essentially owned by various “Sirva Companies.” Allied required Astro to perform criminal background checks for all of its employees which would perform work for Allied. Employees with “serious criminal convictions” were prohibited from working on Allied jobs.

The Griffin employees consented to background checks which revealed that the employees were convicted of felony sexual offenses. Astro then terminated the Griffin employees who sued Astro, Allied, and Sirva.

Criminal Conviction Discrimination Law in New York

New York law prohibits public and private employers from denying employment to any individual who has been previously convicted of a criminal offense. The law makes two exceptions: (1) where the crime has a direct relationship to the employment, or (2) where the employment would create an unreasonable risk to safety or property. If an employer relies on the “unreasonable risk” exception, it must consider eight factors established by the Corrections Law. Failing to do so constitutes a violation of the Corrections Law.

In Griffin, the court was confronted with the question of whether Allied and Sirva could be liable, since the employees did not work directly for them. The Second Circuit decided it could not decide the issue because the New York law was unsettled. So, it certified three questions to the New York Court of Appeals:

1. Does the New York State Human Rights law limit liability to the “aggrieved person’s employer?”
2. If so, what constitutes an employer?
3. Can out-of-state corporations be liable for “aiding and abetting” criminal conviction discrimination within New York?

New York Court of Appeals Decides

On the first question, the Court of Appeals reviewed the two applicable statutes: The Human Rights Law and the Correction Law. The court found significant language in the Correction Law which prohibits conduct of “public or private employers,” noting the language targets employers. The statute’s language also states that liability arises when an application is made “at” an employer. The court concluded that the employment must relate to a specific employer. Taken all together, the Court of Appeals decided that criminal conviction discrimination applies only to an individual’s employer.

Next, the Court of Appeals had to decide what constitutes an employer, specifically, whether the agency relationship in Griffin constituted an employer. For this question, the Court of Appeals decided that the common law definition of employer applies. The Court noted four factors: (1) selection of the servant; (2) payment of salary; (3) power to terminate; and (4) level of control over the servant. Court further noted that “right of control” is the essential factor.

Finally, the Court had to decide whether an out-of-state corporation which is not an “employer” under the law can be liable for criminal conviction discrimination for aiding and abetting discrimination. Here, the Court decided that the Human Rights Law applies to out-of-state defendants because so that New York residents are protected from discrimination within the State. The Court of Appeals easily held that out-of-state corporations may be liable as aiders and abettors because it applies to all “persons” and is not limited to employers.

Criminal Conviction Discrimination Lawyers on Long Island

Famighetti & Weinick PLLC are attorneys on Long Island who handle cases of criminal conviction discrimination in New York. If you have questions about criminal conviction discrimination, the Griffin decision, or the New York Human Rights Law, call 631-352-0050 to speak a Long Island employment lawyer or visit our website at https://www.linycemploymentlaw.com.