The Superior Court has dismissed the criminal case against a
former employee of the Department of Labor who was among eight
persons arrested in 2008 for alleged involvement in bribery and
conspiracy to forge documents submitted to Labor.
Blog About: Wiseman junks charges against ex-Labor staff
Continue the discussion on your blog. Click to highlight this excerpt and press Ctrl+C to copy.
Related Articles
Second Circuit Rules No Title VII Claims Where Employee Suffered No Adverse Employment Action.
Finding that the plaintiff suffered no adverse employment action, the U.S. Court of Appeals in New York has affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer, the New York State Department of Labor, on the plaintiffAcircs claims for alleged race discrimination and harassment in violation of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Cunnigham v. New York State DepAcirct of Labor, No. 08-0992-cv 2d Cir. June 10, 2009 summary order. However, the Court reversed summary judgment on the plaintiffAcircs retaliation claims and remanded the case for further proceedings.
United States: Department of Labor Publishes Final Rule on...
United States: Department of Labor Publishes Final Rule on Nonagricultural Child Labor 10 June 2010 On May 20, 2010, the United States Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division published a Final Rule updating regulations relating to nonagricultural child labor under the Fair Labor Standards Act .
Labor department investigating Tioga Downs
The state Department of Labor is investigating Tioga Downs, a
spokeswoman said. Michelle Duffy of the labor department would not
say what the nature of the investigation is, but a former employee
of the popular Southern Tier casino, harness track and
entertainment center offered some insight.
Arias v. Superior Court of San Joaquin Valley
(Cal., Class Actions, Labor & Employment Law) In an action alleging violations of the Labor Code, labor regulations, and an Industrial Welfare Commission wage order, Court of Appeals judgment is affirmed where: 1) employee who sues an employer under the unfair competition law for Labor Code violations must satisfy class action requirements, and Proposition 64's amendment of law does not require otherwise; and 2) class action requirements do not need to be satisfied when an aggrieved employee seeks civil penalties for himself and other employees under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 for an employer's alleged Labor Code violations.
Supervisor's Dislike of Employees Not Proof of Retaliation or Discrimination
An employee who is passed over for promotion -- time and again -- may feel like the whole world is against them. 
Even so, the fact that supervisors and coworkers may "dislike" a particular employee is not enough to prove that the employer retaliated against the employee for participation in a discrimination claim.
So says, the Second Circuit in a case last month arising out of Connecticut. In Lomotey v. Department of Transportation (Dec. 4, 2009), the ...
More news & reviews:
Share:
