Search for: "Supervisor #1 alleged, & #2"
Results 221 - 240
of 2,098
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jan 2011, 7:15 am
Huff, certified a nationwide FLSA collective action and a California Rule 23 action arising from an alleged policy maintained by Costco which required closing shit hourly employees to remain locked inside Costco warehouses without pay while supervisors performed closing activities, such as removing jewelry from cases and emptying cash registers. [read post]
15 May 2014, 4:00 am
" Thus, for pleading purposes, the court ruled that the complaint need not specify the actual law, rule or regulation violated, although it must identify the particular activities, policies or practices in which the employer allegedly engaged, so that the complaint provides the employer with notice of the alleged complained-of conduct.The Court of Appeals observed that in order to recover under a Labor Law §740 theory, the plaintiff has the burden of proving [1] that an… [read post]
Hearing officer considers failed efforts at “progressive discipline” in setting disciplinary penalty
25 Aug 2016, 4:00 am
The ALJ explained that HRA did not provide any corroboration to support the statements it alleged Bryant had made nor did not specify Bryant’s words or actions it alleged were discourtesy or threatening. [read post]
27 Nov 2017, 7:17 am
BC, slip op. at 2. [read post]
27 Jul 2023, 2:19 pm
Defendant objects to the proposed Amended Complaint because it: (1) includes an untimely jury demand; and (2) now spells out the racial epithet allegedly directed at Plaintiff by his supervisor. [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
Plaintiff claimed that as a result of his reports to supervisors, he became “the victim of a concerted retaliatory attack by supervisors and coworkers who were aware that he had blown the whistle. [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
Plaintiff claimed that as a result of his reports to supervisors, he became “the victim of a concerted retaliatory attack by supervisors and coworkers who were aware that he had blown the whistle. [read post]
20 Oct 2021, 3:30 am
The plaintiff alleged that: (1) she overheard two co-workers talking in the bathroom about wanting the plaintiff transferred to another unit; (2) a co-worker called her lazy and a bad worker; (3) a co-worker talked about her in a foreign language; and (4) a co-worker used demeaning hand gestures when talking to her. [read post]
1 May 2022, 7:36 am
Her supervisors alleged she missed 20 days over a six-month period, though she allegedly never sought permission and, in some cases, failed to tell her supervisors or co-workers that she wouldn’t be there. [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 4:00 am
" The court determined that "plaintiff's good faith efforts in the manner and filing of his reporting, first informally to his immediate supervisors, and then soon thereafter to the [DOI], satisfactorily met the requirements of Civil Service Law §75-b (2). [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 2:04 pm
These include proof that: (1) you were a public employee, (2) you made a “protected disclosure or objection,” (3) you suffered an adverse employment action, and (4) there was a causal link between your protected activity and the adverse action. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 9:45 am
If the former employee files a complaint, OSHA will investigate the issue only if it finds that the employee, through the complaint and through interviews, has shown that he (1) made a protected complaint, (2) suffered an adverse employment action, such as termination, and (3) that the circumstances were sufficient to raise the inference that the protected complaint was a contributing factor of the adverse employment action. [read post]
21 May 2015, 10:22 am
County Board of Supervisors; here are the key allegations: 5. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 5:00 pm
(2) Assault by auto or vessel is a crime of the third degree if the person drives the vehicle while in violation of R.S.39:4-50 or section 2 of P.L.1981, c.512 (C.39:4-50.4a) and serious bodily injury results and is a crime of the fourth degree if the person drives the vehicle while in violation of R.S.39:4-50 or section 2 of P.L.1981, c.512 (C.39:4-50.4a) and bodily injury results [read post]
17 May 2023, 6:19 am
The plaintiff is a corrections officer who alleges she suffered retaliation for complaining about discrimination in the workplace. [read post]
12 Aug 2021, 2:00 am
The employer argued (1) the retaliation claims weren’t based on adverse actions, or (2) any adverse action wasn’t linked to her protected activity. [read post]
25 May 2023, 2:00 am
Plaintiff Trevor Murray alleges he was terminated in retaliation for raising concerns to his supervisor about his employer (UBS) committing fraud on shareholders. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 10:20 am
On April 1, 2016, new regulations interpreting and expanding upon the statutory language go into effect. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 6:10 am
In analyzing the case, the Court said that, to establish a prima facie case and avoid summary judgment on an ERISA claim of interference with the attainment of an ERISA-protected benefit, a plaintiff must show the existence of a genuine issue of material fact that there was: (1) prohibited employer conduct; (2) taken for the purpose of interfering; (3) with the attainment of any right to which the employee may become entitled. [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 7:29 am
Cahill, complaint at 2. [read post]
