Employment law and employment discrimination include examining human relationships and motives at work. Human relationships fascinate us who enjoy the challenge of litigating and mediating these disputes. Few places top New York for this niche area of law.

Jonas Urba owns Urba Law PLLC. He has more than two decades of employment law and employment litigation experience. This area is all about careful attention to the facts which matter. Some facts sound interesting. As you will read, the order in which your facts occur make all the difference for employment matters.

Unlike written agreements, including nondisclosure, noncompetition, and severance contracts, the timeline for employment discrimination facts is crucially important. Courts prefer contracts. Written agreements are reviewed by many employment lawyers for flat fees. Well-drafted ones usually never see courtrooms. Listen to Jonas discussing how courts continue encouraging contracts between employers and employees in this video:

https://youtu.be/VgXn-OFhdSs

However, discrimination claims differ from the black and white language we see in restrictive covenant agreements. We need strong facts, in the right order, for great results. Even the best employment lawyers can’t make them up.

“I feel I was discriminated” is not a fact. It’s an opinion.

“I was wrongfully terminated” is not a fact. It’s an opinion.

“I worked in a hostile workplace” is not a fact. It’s an opinion.

Employees who relay strong facts supporting the above opinions may have great claims, despite not connecting the dots or knowing the legal terms. Complaining about discrimination is a good idea. But not doing so in New York might be excusable. Claims for discrimination, unlawful conduct, or broken contracts might still be options.

Let’s analyze a mega millions, October 2022 jury verdict in favor of an employee. In that hostile workplace case retaliation was found. The employee had complained with demotion, an unjustified PIP, then termination. Punitive damages were awarded to set an example. Here are some of the key facts:

  • Employee worked for the same company for 14 years
  • Employee received excellent performance evaluations
  • Employee was promoted at least a half dozen times
  • Employee’s new manager cut the employee’s pay and demoted the employee
  • Employee complained to human resources, identified the protected class to which they belonged, alleged demotion because of protected class. This is different from “I don’t like my new manager”. Managers don’t have to be nice. But no one may be demoted because of a protected class to which they belong.
  • Employee was placed on a performance improvement plan and then fired
  • Employer failed to adequately train its human resources employees and managers that discrimination goes beyond “racial or discriminatory comments”, none in this case, and that no matter how many written policies a huge corporation may have those policies are people driven, not automatic.

Most employment discrimination complaints do not result in huge jury verdicts. The reality is that the majority of employment cases are settled. But that does not excuse any claim from being prepared as if it will be litigated. Regardless of how tough your employment lawyer is, no employer can be forced to settle. Even the threat of bad publicity rarely works. The best a skilled lawyer does is invest time up front preparing for litigation if necessary. Employment law resolutions are unique from personal injury ones. It’s very rare to see employees with horrific injury photos, ambulance images, or surgical nightmares. Employment law and personal injury are almost polar opposites in many respects.

The key to employment law and employment discrimination cases is strong facts.

Regardless of your facts, courts interpret laws differently every day. The toughest employment lawyers spend lots of time digging for strong facts. Then they research those facts extensively. Thereafter, strategies are evaluated. Weak facts rarely yield great results. Even claims with strong facts are extensively researched to make sure no underlying claim is overlooked. It all takes time, lots of it.

Jonas invested time working in healthcare, banking and finance, retail foods, sales and marketing, automotive, heavy manufacturing, and within the health industry before law school. Organizational behavior has always drawn him. Understanding the internal workings of organizations is key for developing plausible theories. Feelings, suspicions, or hunches do not prove cases.

Each employee’s facts are unique. Their backgrounds are unique. Career struggles and hardships are unique. These facts must be expressed in writing as well as verbally and doing so takes time and commitment. They must be tied to communication, events, or overt acts to prove discriminatory animus. This is never easy and our skilled colleagues never imply that anyone’s employment law complaint is a slam dunk regardless of the facts. Commitment and patience from employees and their employment lawyers are required. Here are some of the laws:

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

New York State Human Rights Law aka the Executive Law

Equal Pay Act expanded by New York

Americans with Disabilities Act expanded by New York

Fair Labor Standards Act and New York’s Labor Laws

Age Discrimination in Employment Act expanded by New York

A hostile workplace is more than just a nasty or unpleasant one. It has to include some type of discrimination. Calling those claims discriminatory hostile workplace claims makes sense. Most commonly included are:

1. Race, color discrimination

2. National origin, ethnicity, ancestry discrimination

3. Sex, gender discrimination

4. Disability, perceived disability discrimination

5. Severance, noncompetition agreements, employment offers and contracts

6. State and local government civil servant protection when discriminated

7. Unfair pay practices related to gender, sex, and other protected classes as well as misclassified salaried employees who were entitled to overtime compensation which was unpaid

ACTUAL FORMER CLIENT REVIEWS:

Google Reviews

Martindale Reviews

AVVO Reviews

More than 60 YouTube videos on various employment law topics at “Employment Law Reality Check” on YouTube here:

V. Jonas Urba, Esq.’s YouTube Channel

Urba Law PLLC Fights Race Discrimination

Urba Law PLLC Fights Gender, Hostile Workplace, & Pay Inequity Discrimination

Urba Law PLLC Fights Disability Discrimination

Urba Law PLLC’s Severance Blog

Urba Law PLLC Contact Us About

Salaried Nurse Consultant Might Not be Owed Overtime but Those without Independent Judgment Might

Severance Blog Noncompetition Agreements

How to File EEOC Charge – Best to Retain Lawyer

Urba Law’s video suggests Employees keep Copies of their Personnel Files

Urba Law’s video on Employment Application Dishonesty

Urba Law’s video on why Rebuttals are Important when placed on a PIP

Urba Law’s video on the Defend Trade Secrets Act

Urba Law’s video on why Calling beats Texting Employment Lawyers

Urba Law video on how it represents Clients in Buffalo, Oswego, Manhattan and anywhere in between

Urba Law’s video that assigning Value to an Employment Discrimination Case takes Time

Urba Law’s video on why Employers’ Defenses are stronger if Policies were followed

Urba Law’s video on why the Strongest Employment Discrimination Claims may be Hidden

Urba Law’s video that Restrictive Covenants protect Confidential Info Relationships

Urba Law’s video on 2019 changes to NY Executive Law eliminating severe or pervasive standard for Hostile Workplaces

Urba Law’s video on why Noncompetition Nonsolicitation Agreements may be Enforced

Urba Law’s video on why retaining an Employment Discrimination Lawyer before going for Media Attention might be best