Labor & Employment Law

LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW DECISIONS

Source: Findlaw ? A Thomson Company, Copyright ©2008 by Findlaw, redistributed with permission. For subscription information go to: http://newsletters.findlaw.com/nl/

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, January 08, 2008
Goulet v. New Penn Motor Express, Inc., No. 06-2487
In a suit alleging breach of a labor agreement by an employer and breach of the duty of fair representation by a union, verdicts in favor of defendants are affirmed where: 1) any error in the court's directed verdict in favor of the employer was harmless since wrongly directed verdicts in favor of a party are harmless where the jury's ultimate verdict necessarily defeats the claim against the dismissed party; 2) plaintiff waived any objection to the jury charge; and 3) the evidence was sufficient to support jury findings against the plaintiff. Read more...

U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 08, 2008
Evans v. Eaton Corp. Long Term Disability Plan, No. 06-2252
In suit by terminated employee to recover long-term disability benefits under ERISA, award of benefits to plaintiff is reversed where the district court applied a de novo review standard rather than an abuse of discretion standard. Read more...

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 07, 2008
Staunch v. Cont'l Airlines, Inc., No. 07-3315
In flight attendant's action against an employer raising claims for interference and retaliation under the Family Medical Leave Act, and state law claims for pregnancy discrimination and wrongful termination, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff was not an "eligible employee" under the FMLA; and 2) her state law claims were without merit. Read more...

In a case brought by a police officer alleging that, after an altercation at a bar while he was off duty, he was unlawfully required to take the breathalyzer test in violation of his constitutional rights, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) under a totality-of-the-circumstances analysis, plaintiff was not seized when he submitted to the breathalyzer test, but was only afraid he would be terminated or suspended if he didn't take it; and 2) thus, no constitutional violation occurred. Read more...

U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 11, 2008
Lulaj v. Wackenhut Corp., No. 06-2163, 06-2165
Denial of employer's motion for renewed judgment as a matter of law, or a new trial, following a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff on a claim of sex discrimination is affirmed where plaintiff raised sufficient evidence to support a claim of discrimination. A decision reducing the jury's determination of damages and the award of attorney's fees are also affirmed as: 1) the jury found that plaintiff was not constructively discharged, and thus an award of front pay was properly reduced to zero; 2) similarly, an award of back pay was also properly limited; and 3) there was no abuse of discretion in the fees award. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 09, 2008
Miyler v. Village of East Galesburg, No. 06-3625
In a suit under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 claiming violation of plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment rights after he lost his position as chief of police, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where plaintiff did not have a constitutionally-protected property interest in his position. Read more...

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 11, 2008
Darst v. Interstate Brands Corp., No. 04-2460
In a suit alleging that plaintiff's termination violated the Family and Medical Leave Act, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the defendant's violation of FMLA procedures by inquiring about date discrepancies between his medical certification and insurance form did not prejudice plaintiff since he was not entitled to FMLA leave for the dates in question; 2) defendant's failure to request a second opinion regarding the date discrepancies did not interfere with plaintiff's rights since he was not entitled to FMLA leave during those dates; and 3) plaintiff offered no evidence that he was in an alcohol treatment program during the dates in question that would have entitled him to FMLA leave. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 07, 2008
Hepp v. Astrue, No. 06-4103
Denial of claimant's application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act is affirmed over claims that: 1) claimant was denied due process because he did not get an opportunity to cross-examine properly one of the medical examiners; and 2) an ALJ's decision denying benefits was unsupported by substantial evidence because it contained inconsistencies and improperly weighed the medical evidence. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 09, 2008
Stodghill v. Wellston Sch. Dist., No. 07-1190
In a suit by a superintendent against his former school district and officials arising from alleged stigmatizing public comments made about plaintiff in connection with his severance, denial of defendants' motion to dismiss is reversed where the alleged statements at issue, as a matter of law, were not sufficiently stigmatizing to trigger his procedural due process right to a name clearing hearing. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 07, 2008
United Steelworkers of Am. v. Retirement Income Plan for Hourly-Rated Employees of ASARCO, Inc., No. 05-16833, 06-15862
In a union and retirees' action against the owner and operator of a copper smelter plant's retirement plan seeking to compel arbitration of retirees' benefits claims, summary judgment for plaintiffs, denial of defendant's motion to stay, and an award of attorney's fees is affirmed in part and remanded where: 1) the presumption of arbitrability applies in this case; 2) consequently, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment for the union, as the union's interpretation of the relevant plan documents is at least a reasonable interpretation of the relevant language; 3) a request for arbitration was not untimely; 4) retirees are not excluded from the arbitration procedure; 5) neither the judicial estoppel nor the law of the case doctrines apply to bar the union from opposing defendant's motion to stay; and 6) the fees award was not an abuse of discretion. The matter is remanded for further proceedings on what effect an automatic bankruptcy stay has on the fees awa! rd against the employer. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 08, 2008
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. E. Bay Taxi Drivers Ass'n & Bhd. of Teamsters, No. 05-73752, 05-73813
An NLRB decision finding that petitioner-cab company's taxicab drivers are "employees", as opposed to independent contractors, and that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act by refusing to meet and engage in collective bargaining with a union is affirmed where the conclusion that the drivers are employees within the meaning of the Act was supported by substantial evidence that the company exercised considerable control over the means and manner of its drivers' performance and did not provide them the ability to pursue entrepreneurial opportunities. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 09, 2008
Saffon v. Wells Fargo & Co. Long Term Disability Plan, No. 05-56824
In an ERISA action arising from defendant-plan administrator's termination of her long-term disability benefits, denial of relief for plaintiff is vacated and remanded where: 1) the district court applied the wrong legal standard in reviewing the plan administrator's determination that plaintiff is not disabled; and 2) the plan administrator's procedures and its rationales required reconsideration, and plaintiff was entitled to an opportunity to present evidence regarding an issue that was newly raised by defendant in its final denial letter. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 09, 2008
Golden Gate Restaurant Ass'n v. City & County of San Francisco, No. 07-17370, 07-17372
In an action challenging certain provisions of the newly enacted San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance, arguing that they are preempted by federal law, a motion to stay an injunction preventing implementation and enforcement of the disputed provisions is granted as: 1) the city and intervenors have a probability, even a strong likelihood, of success in their argument that the ordinance is not preempted by ERISA; 2) the balance of hardships tips sharply in favor of city and intervenors; and 3) the public interest will be served by a stay. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 11, 2008
Nelson v. Nat'l Aeronautics & Space Admin., No. 07-56424
In an action brought by scientists, engineers, and administrative support personnel at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) challenging NASA's recently adopted requirement that "low risk" contract employees like themselves submit to in-depth background investigations, denial of plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction is reversed and remanded where they raised serious questions as to the merits of their informational privacy and APA claims, and the balance of hardships tipped sharply in their favor. Read more...

U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 10, 2008
Utah Educ. Ass'n v. Shurtleff, No. 06-4142
In an action brought by various Utah labor unions claiming that Utah's Voluntary Contributions Act (VCA) violates the First Amendment by restricting public employees' political speech, summary judgment for the unions is affirmed where: 1) state restrictions on payroll systems owned and maintained by independent local governments and school boards do not fall under the nonpublic forum exception to ordinary First Amendment analysis; 2) because the VCA regulates political contributions, "exacting scrutiny" applies; and 3) the VCA is unconstitutional as applied to municipalities, counties, school districts, and other local public employers. Read more...

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 07, 2008
Doyle v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston, No. 07-10348
In case where ERISA administrator denied benefits to a plan beneficiary, summary judgment for the administrator is reversed as the court used the wrong standard of review and application of the proper standard would not yield the same result. Read more...

U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, January 08, 2008
Van Voorhis v. Hillsborough County Bd. of County Comm'rs, No. 07-12672
In suit by helicopter pilot alleging discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Florida Civil Rights Act, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where plaintiff presented direct evidence of discrimination on the basis of age and evidence of an adverse employment action. Read more...

U.S. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, January 11, 2008
Nat'l Mining Ass'n v. MSHA, No. 07-1026
Petition for review challenging final rule requiring mine operators to place portable oxygen devices in escapeways of the mine and in a "hardened room" cache is denied over claims that: 1) respondent failed to give adequate notice of the hardened room option; 2) the MINER Act precluded respondent from promulgating the hardened room option; 3) the hardened room option is arbitrary and capricious as respondent did not sufficiently explain its decision; and 4) respondent failed to comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act as it did not analyze the economic impact of the hardened room option. Read more...