Atlanta Employment Attorneys Blog

Georgia Exotic Dancer Launches New FLSA Lawsuit Against Athens Club

January 13, 2016 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

A woman who previously worked as an exotic dancer at an Athens club recently launched a class action lawsuit accusing her former employer of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the former employee, the club improperly withheld wages, overtime pay, and tips by improperly classifying her as an independent contractor when she was really an employee, the Athens Banner-Herald reported on its website, OnlineAthens.com. The Athens case is the latest in a string of lawsuits in which exotic dancers have challenged the legality of the way their clubs pay them.

In the recent case, Christie Burrell danced for three years at Toppers International Showbar, a well-known club in downtown Athens. During her entire employment, the club classified Burrell and all its other dancers as independent contractors, not employees. By doing so, the club avoided some of the requirements the FLSA imposes on employers regarding the payment of employees, specifically compliance with minimum wage and overtime rules. Burrell’s action claimed that, even though the club permitted, and sometimes demanded, dancers to work 40 hours or more per week, the dancers never received wages or overtime. Instead, the only compensation the dancers at the club received was their tips. To make matters worse, the club allegedly didn’t even pay the dancers all of the tips they earned, since the club engaged in “siphoning away” part of that money “to distribute to non-tip eligible employees.”

11th Circuit Rules that Replacing an Employee in His 40s with Another in His 40s Can Still Possibly Be Age Discrimination

January 6, 2016 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

A Florida man should not have had his age discrimination case thrown out, even though both he and his replacement were both in their 40s. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals decided to reverse a summary judgment in favor of the man’s employer, stating that an age discrimination case requires only a “substantially younger” replacement and that the employee’s allegation that age bias was the reason the employer replaced him with a man seven years his junior was enough to meet this “substantially younger” standard.

The employee, Robert Liebman, had worked for Metropolitan Life Insurance Company for 28 years when MetLife fired him in 2013. He started in 1985 as a sales representative and, by 2013, had risen to the position of Managing Director of the insurer’s West Palm Beach and Boca Raton offices. At the time of his termination, Liebman was 49 years old. Liebman sued MetLife for violating the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The employer asked the trial court to grant summary judgment in its favor on the age discrimination claim, noting that the employee that it selected to replace Liebman was also over 40 years of age and, therefore, a member of the same protected class as Liebman. The trial court sided with the employer and issued a summary judgment order in favor of the insurer.

Georgia Job Applicant Allowed to Pursue Disparate-Impact Age Discrimination Claim

December 28, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

A North Georgia man’s claim that R.J. Reynolds’ hiring practices for sales manager jobs violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act got new life as a result of a recent decision by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court decided that both employees and job applicants alike can pursue age discrimination claims based upon the discriminatory results created by an employer’s policies.

The case involved Richard Villarreal’s pursuit of employment with R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. In November 2007, Villarreal submitted an application to Reynolds through an online job board, Careerbuilder, for a sales manager position. At that time, Villarreal was 49 years old. The employer never contacted the applicant about the job. In May 2010, he filed an ADEA violation claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Sixth Circuit Says City Allowed to Suspend Police Officer After Brain Surgery

December 18, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

An employer’s obligation to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act and refrain from discriminating against employees with disabilities places certain limitations on what an employer can and cannot do. One obligation an employer does not have under the law is to accommodate an employee if that accommodation would mean that the employee would pose a health or safety risk to himself or others. The existence of this risk was what doomed a policeman’s case in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The case is helpful for Tennessee employers in assessing how to deal with employees who are potential risks.

The employee in the case, Todd Michael, had been a policeman with the City of Troy, Michigan, for two decades when others around him began noticing instances of odd behavior. The police chief began an investigation of Michael. The chief eventually suspended the investigation in 2009 when Michael informed the chief that he needed brain surgery.

Georgia Employees’ Discrimination, Whistleblower Claims Falter Due to Late Filing

December 11, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

A pair of minority employees at a jail in Georgia lost the chance to go to trial on their claims that their employer committed racial discrimination and then retaliated against them when they filed formal complaints about the misconduct, due to their timing for suing their employer. The US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia decided that the employees’ claims were not filed within the period of time required by the law, so the case could not proceed.

The employees in this case were Justin Ramzy and Alicia Spearman, who worked as part of the medical team in the Muscogee County Jail. The employees, both of whom were African-American, suffered what they believed was racial discrimination at work. After Ramzy and Spearman filed a complaint about the discrimination in 2012, Ramzy was terminated the next year for violating medical team protocol regarding the recording of patient medical information. Ramzy claimed that other white employees did the same thing but weren’t punished. Spearman produced documents that backed up Ramzy’s claim.

Georgia Supreme Court Says Home Care Workers Covered by State’s Minimum Wage Law

December 4, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

In a unanimous decision, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled in November that home care workers who are employed by third-party service providers and perform their jobs in the homes of the employers’ clients are not exempt from the Georgia minimum wage law. The employees, who may have opened the door for similar claims from thousands of workers, argued successfully that, when one included their time traveling from one client home to another within a single work day, they received total compensation that amounted to less than $5.15 per hour.

The employer in this case was Res-Care, Inc., and its subsidiary, Southern Home Care Services. The employer was in the business of providing in-home care and personal support services. Employees might help clients bathe, go to the bathroom, dress, groom themselves, and get around their home. They also might undertake some domestic chores like washing dishes and laundry. Employees often provided care to multiple clients during a single day, and they were not paid for traveling from one home to another.

11th Circuit: Attacking Employer’s Business Judgment Not Enough to Show Pretext in Discrimination Case

November 25, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

An employee at an auto parts manufacturer was unsuccessful in his pursuit of his claim of race and national origin discrimination. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the employer because the employee’s attacks on the employer’s nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions did not demonstrate that the employer’s reasons were mere pretexts for discrimination. Although the case originated in Alabama, the 11th Circuit’s ruling is very instructive for Georgia employees regarding what does (or does not) show pretext in employment discrimination cases.

The alleged victim of discrimination was Claude Short, who had worked for Mando American Corp. as the Quality Director at its Opelika, Alabama facility since 2006. By late 2008, the employer had transitioned Short into a new role. The employer wanted Short to work from an office in suburban Detroit, but he persuaded the company to let him work from a vacation home he owned in Tennessee.

Alert to Tennessee Employers: Errors in Your Employee Manuals Can Cost You When it Comes to FMLA Litigation

November 18, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

A county road commission worker was able to deflect his employer’s attempt to defeat his Family and Medical Leave Act case by arguing that the employee was ineligible. Although the employee was, in fact, ineligible, the employer’s poorly worded employee manual appeared to promise FMLA coverage to the employee. That was enough for the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals to decide the employee was allowed to go forward to trial with the argument that the employer should be legally barred from arguing about eligibility as a result of the misrepresentation and the employee’s reliance upon it.

The worker who sued was Terry Tilley, an employee of the Kalamazoo County Road Commission. In late July 2011, Tilley’s supervisor reprimanded him for failing to complete certain assignments on time. The supervisor imposed a new set of deadlines by which Tilley must have his work finished or else face additional punishment, including job termination. On the morning of the last day for completing one of the assignments, Tilley suffered a medical event that led to his admission to a hospital, from which he was not released until the next day.

Alleged Recruiting Violations Doom Georgia High School Football Coach’s Racial Discrimination Suit

November 11, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

An African-American high school football coach, the first in a west Georgia high school’s history since desegregation, lasted only two seasons before getting fired. The school alleged that it acted due to the coach’s improper recruiting practices. The coach claimed that racial discrimination was the real reason. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a summary judgment in favor of the school in the coach’s Title VII case. The outcome serves as a reminder to Georgia employers and employees that, in showing that the stated reason for termination was a mere pretext for discrimination, an employee must not simply show that the employer’s basis was incorrect or unfounded. As long as the employer honestly believed the nondiscriminatory reason for the firing, the action was not a pretext for discrimination, no matter how wrong that reasoning was.

The coach was Charles Flowers, who had won state championships in football and baseball while coaching at Shaw High School in Columbus from 1987 to 2005. In 2010, Troup High School hired Flowers, who became the first African-American football coach at the school since Troup County schools desegregated in 1973.

New Transgender Discrimination Case Could Have Impact on Tennessee Employers, Employees

November 4, 2015 | Parks, Chesin & Walbert

A new case still making its way through the pre-trial process in a federal court in Michigan could eventually offer new and additional clarity for Tennessee employers and employees regarding the law of discrimination against transgender people in the workplace if it reaches the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The case serves as a renewed reminder that, although transgender people are not expressly covered by Title VII, the law does prohibit employers from discriminating using sex-based stereotypes, and such prohibitions already extend to matters like an employee’s shift from wearing stereotypically male clothes to female clothes as part of the employee’s transitioning process.

The employee in the case was Amiee Stephens, who had worked as a funeral director and embalmer at R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. in suburban Detroit since the fall of 2007. In the summer of 2013, Stephens, who had lived as a man up to that point, informed her employer that she was transgender, was in the process of transitioning from male to female, and would begin attending work in business-appropriate women’s wear. Within less than three weeks, the funeral home had declared the employee’s proposed actions unacceptable and fired her.