June 12, 2020

The Week in FFCRA Complaints

The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), which came into effect on April 1, is a bill aimed at providing a host of stop-gap measures to ensure workers have some economic and workplace rights in the face of the coronavirus pandemic. Among the measures were stipulations for enhanced food stamp funding, 14 days of paid leave for workers affected by Covid and free testing. 

As part of our ongoing coverage of how coronavirus is affecting workplace conditions and employment rights, we are providing a weekly summary of complaints filed to challenge alleged FFCRA violations. These include issues around remote work, caregiving, and workplace safety. We hope to provide you with a list of cases every week and to highlight some of them here to keep you apprised of the changing legal landscape which will surely have a significant impact on the way New Yorkers, and all Americans, will do business in the coming months. 

  • Palmer v. Amazon.com, Inc. (E.D.N.Y.)
  • Amazon warehouse workers and some of their family members are suing the company for failing to follow New York labor law and state and federal public health guidelines at a Staten Island warehouse during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Plaintiffs allege Amazon's actions led to the death of at least one worker and caused other workers to bring the virus home to their families. The suit accuses Amazon of prioritizing productivity over keeping sick workers home and instituting proper hygiene and social distancing practices at its facilities. Following the suit's filing, Amazon told Law360 it always followed federal and state health guidance and complied with all laws. The company also said it has passed all 91 inspections it received from state health and safety regulatory agencies since March.
  • Lin v. CGIT Systems, Inc. (D. Mass) [remote work]
  • Plaintiff, a Chinese-American engineer, is suing his employer for disability, age, and race/national origin discrimination and retaliation under Massachusetts law for firing him to "make an example" out of his refusal to work from the office during the Covid-19 pandemic. Plaintiff has high blood pressure and lives with his 81-year-old mother, who has heart disease, a pacemaker, high blood pressure and diabetes. Three days after he was terminated, an employee tested positive and the entire office was instructed to work from home.
  • Stivers v. Indiana Limestone Acquisition, LLC (S.D.I.N.) [leave for loss of caregiver]
  • Plaintiff, a limestone sawyer sued his employer, a limestone company, under FFCRA and FMLA for not paying him through his approved leave, not preserving his employment, and retaliating with termination.
  • When Plaintiff's mother, the child-care provider of his one-year-old child, was ordered to self-quarantine for a month due to Covid-19 symptoms, Plaintiff sought to take leave. His employer also required Plaintiff to quarantine himself for at least two weeks after he reported his mother's quarantine to HR. Plaintiff's one-month leave was approved and he was paid at 2/3 of his regular pay. However, before the month was over, the employer terminated the Plaintiff, saying it was for "reduction in force," and then proceeded to refill the position with someone much less experienced who required significant training.

Other cases for the period June 3-10 are Winters v. Stone Transport Holding, Inc. (E.D.M.I.) [remote work], Reyna v. Cascade Health Services, LLC (S.D.T.X.) [nursing home employee] Kirkpatrick v. Mathis Battery Co. (W.D.K.Y.)

The First Recession for Women

August 11, 2020
Gender Discrimination
There is a new feature to the pandemic-induced recession that has decimated employment, manufacturing, child care, education, and just about every other facet of life. It is women, not men who are the most greatly affected by the force of the shutdown.

The Berke-Weiss Law Weekly Roundup: Black Pregnancy in New York City and School Reopening Reversals

August 10, 2020
Race Discrimination
Pregnancy Discrimination
We’re now a week into the expiration of the enhanced unemployment benefits of the CARES Act and the news is not good. Congress and the White House remain at least a trillion of dollars apart on a new deal, with the Senate GOP split, though their prized bit of the CARES Act, the corporate bailout, did not have an expiration date, unlike those parts aimed at protecting workers, such as the PUA and eviction moratoriums. Thus, with depressing predictability, there were a spate of alarming stories this week echoing the fears that tenant unions and activists have been voicing for months: by ending employment relief we are hurtling toward a cliff, over which lies massive, nationwide evictions.

The Week in FFCRA Complaints: Yet More Wrongful Terminations and Retaliation

August 10, 2020
Leave
Disability Discrimination
As we noted last week, employers seem not to have gotten the message on paid leave under FFCRA and the two notable cases that came up this week both involve employer retaliation and wrongful termination against employees who were protected under FFCRA.

Get In Touch

Knowing where to turn in legal matters can make a big difference. Contact our employment lawyers to determine if we can help you.