Blog(Dev) - Page 23 of 78 - Sidkoff, Pincus & Green

Why Do Many Successful Asian Americans Face Workplace Discrimination?

By , 25th August 2021

Asian Americans Workplace Discrimination

Asian Americans are among the best-educated per capita of any racial or ethnic demographic in the United States. That is especially true in the tech industry, where Asian Americans generally do well in finding and holding jobs but are disproportionately overlooked.

Due to Coronavirus (COVID-19) reportedly originating from China, the Asian Americans and Pacific Islander (AAPI) community has been targeted by more than 3,000 hate crimes since the beginning of the pandemic, according to the group Stop AAPI Hate. That is a great rise in hate crimes targeting the AAPI community since the outbreak of the global pandemic. The sudden rise in violence targeting members of the AAPI community outside of the workplace suggests that they also experience frequent discrimination in the workplace.

Studies Affirm Qualified AAPI Candidates Mostly Overlooked

A 2013 study compiled by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) showed it is nearly four times harder for AAPI employees to achieve managerial positions, despite being fully qualified for internal promotions. U.S. citizens identifying as AAPI comprise about 5.6 percent of the nation’s population, but they account for 12 percent of its licensed professionals.

Additionally, AAPI students comprise more than 10 percent of the annual graduation classes at the top 30 law schools across the nation. However, those same graduates have the highest attrition rate and smallest ratio of partners-to-associates when compared to all other racial and ethnic groups.

Making matters worse is the impression that Asian Americans are generally highly successful and do not need governmental programs. The AAPI community consistently is left out of affirmative action hiring and admissions due to the perceived success in both.

Closer scrutiny reveals that AAPI members generally obtain jobs at relatively high rates when compared to other demographics. However, when it comes to long-term success and the ability to earn promotion to leadership levels, opportunities for AAPI members mostly do not exist. The EEOC says that this is a sign of workplace discrimination.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Fight Against Workplace Discrimination

Hate crimes targeting members of the AAPI community are rising rapidly, while advancement opportunities are more difficult to obtain due to discrimination. When discrimination arises in the workplace, our Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help you. For more information and an initial consultation about your case, call us at 215-574-0600 or complete our online form. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

How can a Worker Tell if They Have Been Misclassified?

By anthony, 23rd August 2021

One of the most common forms of employer fraud comes from misclassified workers. Some unscrupulous companies decide to list workers as independent contractors, which can alter a variety of conditions and skirt some of the commonly practiced laws. If it is not resolved, it can create a slew of problems for the employee. For help with a complex litigation matter regarding misclassification, an employee should speak to a lawyer.

Independent contractors do not receive many benefits and protections compared to regular employees, such as minimum wage, overtime compensation, mandated leaves, unemployment insurance, Workers’ Compensation benefits, and safety laws. It can mean more taxes paid, including Medicare and Social Security, that would normally be shared by employers. Oftentimes the inconsistent pay means employers can pay less in wages and taxes; this actually hurts the overall workplace. Even if the worker in question is a self-owner, this can be used to avoid responsibilities and legal obligations.

There are some major questions to answer if someone should be considered an independent contractor. Some considerations include:

Control of the work: The more training, supervision, and guidance provided by the employer, the more likely the worker should be considered a standard employee. This is the most basic criteria.
Financial control: Employment conditions can rely on who is responsible for the initial investment, paying expenses, payouts, and any limits on profits. Whichever side harbors more responsibility usually determines if someone qualifies as an independent contractor. Employers often control schedules, including time off, the length of working together, and how vital the employee’s work is to the business. If a worker has little say in this matter, it makes it hard for the employer to argue that the individual is a true independent contractor.

What can an Employee Do to Resolve Misclassification?

If a worker has concerns about misclassification, it is best to go to the employer right away. They have an obligation to answer questions truthfully and thoroughly. If unsatisfied, take the case to authorities. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) allows employees to file a form to officially determine worker classification. Usually, the IRS will get involved because it wants to know what businesses may be hiding from the tax authorities. However, this does carry the possibility of disclosure of the employee’s identity, which can lead to retaliation.

It is important to file all necessary forms. For taxes, Form 8919 will resolve any discrepancies regarding paid or unpaid Social Security or Medicare obligations not met by the employer. Filing for unemployment will spur the state to examine the relationship and see if the employee is misclassified.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Misclassified Workers

Challenging an employment classification can be confusing. It can also mean the difference between thousands of unpaid wages or overpaid taxes. Having a lawyer on your side will make a difference. Our Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. know what to do to help your case. Call us today at 215-574-0600 or contact us online for an initial consultation. Based in Philadelphia, we are pleased to serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Can Employers Incentivize Vaccinations?

By , 3rd August 2021

With a national push to get people vaccinated against the Coronavirus (COVID-19), the issue of personal privacy regarding health care is becoming more prominent. That is especially true in states in which vaccination rates are lagging. However, the federal government recently updated guidelines to help clarify workers’ rights to information regarding COVID-19 vaccinations and whether or not they can be fired for not getting vaccinated.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) updated guidelines that affirm employers have a legitimate interest in encouraging all workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19. The need to maintain a safe and healthful workplace generally outweighs individual privacy rights, but medical privacy is especially difficult to overcome.

Rather than deny employers the right to demand vaccination among all workers, the EEOC says employers can encourage workers to obtain vaccinations and share the results. The way in which job providers go about encouraging workers to do so makes a big difference between legal efforts and violating workers’ rights.

Incentives Instead of Coercion

Job providers can encourage workers to obtain vaccinations and share the knowledge of their successful vaccinations with them. The EEOC says workplace incentives are ideal tools for legally encouraging workers to get vaccinated and announce it to coworkers and others. Incentives also are fully legal to encourage virtually all workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Incentives could be financial in nature and generally reward vaccinated workers.

While incentives are acceptable, the EEOC says coercion is strictly prohibited. Incentives essentially enable a worker to choose to participate, whereas coercion forces a worker to participate in violation of federal laws protecting health care privacy.

Coercion essentially tells a worker that unless they get vaccinated, consequences could occur. Those consequences could result in changes in job duties, work hours, or even result in a loss of employment. Coercion instills a sense of fear and could easily trigger a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Vaccination Information Must be Kept Private

When job provides invoke a legal incentives program to encourage workers to become fully vaccinated and share the results, the employer must keep the information private. Although the worker might choose to get vaccinated and share that information with their employer, the employer still has to protect the worker’s private health care information per the ADA.

Many job providers also are offering at-work vaccinations. Many vaccinations require individuals to provide detailed information about their health. That information must be protected, especially if the job provider is the one making it possible for vaccinations to occur while on the job. If a worker feels they are being targeted or discriminated against for not getting vaccinated or because of another issue, they are encouraged to speak to a lawyer.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Workers Understand Their Privacy and Health Care Rights

If you are being coerced into obtaining a full vaccination against COVID-19, our experienced Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can protect your rights. Contact us online or call us at 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

What are the Paycheck Protection Program Loan Updates?

By anthony, 27th July 2021

In 2020, the federal government approved a $900 billion relief package due to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. This package included the Economic Aid Act to help small businesses, nonprofits, and venues keep their companies running. Essentially, the Economic Aid Act made billions of dollars available to entities under the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) in the form of low-interest loans through selected lenders. Those granted loans could then apply for loan forgiveness within 10 months from the end of their covered loan period.

It is important to note that the PPP ended on May 31, 2021, when the Small Business Administration (SBA) announced that funding had been exhausted. The information that follows is meant to help current loan grantees better understand the nuances of their loans and how to apply for forgiveness.

First or Second Round of the Paycheck Protection Program

Certain loan grantees may qualify for a second draw loan of up to $2 million. To meet the requirements, the organization must have fewer than 300 employees, used or will soon use the entire amount of the first loan, and has a decline in gross receipts of at least 25 percent in any quarter of 2020 when compared to the same quarter of 2019. Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) advances received by borrowers are no longer deducted from their PPP loan forgiveness amount.

New Business Entities

New business entity types became eligible to apply for PPP loans in the second round, including:

Chambers of commerce
Trade organizations
Nonprofits or government instrumentalities that engage in destination or tourism
Owners who are delinquent on student loans
Noncitizens who are U.S. residents
Owners with non-fraud related felony convictions

Like the first round, the second round continues to include these eligible entities:

Self-employed
Sole proprietors
Independent contractors
Seasonal businesses
Nonprofit organizations
Housing cooperatives
Veterans organizations

The first PPP round required funds to be used for expenses, such as rent, payroll, utilities, employer-sponsored health insurance, and other eligible costs. The second round still includes these plus additional forgivable expenses:

Operational expenses:For Human Resources, accounting software, and cloud computing.
Property damage: Costs related to public disturbances in 2020 not covered by the organization’s business insurance.
Supplier costs:For payments made to suppliers before receiving the PPP loan needed to keep the business running.
Worker protection costs: COVID-19 worker safety expenses, facility modifications, and supplier costs related to COVID-19 protections.

Current PPP Loan Forgiveness Requirements

The following requirements from the first round and later are still in effect:

The loan must be used to cover payroll costs and other qualifying expenses over the eight- to 24-week period after the loan is made.
The borrower can choose a covered period from eight to 24 weeks and submit the forgiveness application before the end of the 24 weeks if they use PPP funds early.
Employee staffing and compensation levels must be maintained for loans greater than $50,000. PPP loans under $50,000 are exempt from workforce and wage reductions.
Borrowers are eligible for full loan forgiveness if they use at least 60 percent of loan proceeds for payroll expenses, with no more than 40 percent going to qualifying expenses unrelated to payroll.

If a business is experiencing loan issues, it is advisable to speak to a lawyer. A lawyer can assist with business tort litigation matters.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Business With Loans

PPP loans and other government-sponsored programs can be complex. Requirements change often, and businesses need to try to stay on top of them or risk not following the correct procedures. A Philadelphia business lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can address your concerns. Contact us online or call us at 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

How can Schools Prevent Gender Identity Discrimination?

By anthony, 19th July 2021

Executive Order 13988, Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation, expands upon prohibited forms of discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Fair Housing Act. Additionally, the executive order reestablished the transgender rights policy that was published in 2016 by the Department of Education and the Department of Justice. Educational institutions must not discriminate and treat transgender students any differently.

Executive Order 13988 expands the categories for prohibited sex discrimination, including gender identity, expression, and sexual orientation discrimination. It states that children should have the ability to learn in school without having to worry if they will not be allowed to use locker rooms or restrooms or be allowed to play on school sports teams.

The protections also apply to school administrators and staff. The order also states that adults should not have to fear being mistreated, demoted, or fired for not conforming to sex-based stereotypes. Every person is entitled to equal treatment under the law, and this should not be any different based on their gender identity or sexual orientation. Educational institutions and school district leaders must frequently review their policies and procedures to make sure that the rights of transgender students and employees are being protected.

To prohibit any type of discrimination, the first step would be to review anti-discrimination and harassment policies. Schools need to ensure that their locker room and restroom access policies provide the same access for all students and employees consistent with gender identity. Anti-harassment and discrimination training programs also need to be enforced.

How Do I Report a Title IX Violation?

All members of educational communities have to comply with Title IX regulations and Executive Order 13988, from students to faculty to administrators. Anyone who witnesses or is otherwise impacted by behaviors or events that could be construed or perceived as sexual or gender harassment, discrimination, assault or misconduct is required to report it.

Institutions and school districts should have their own procedures for reporting Title IX violations, with steps for reporting and resolving the complaints. Having a supportive process that allows people to report discrimination and be treated fairly is essential, and this fair treatment also applies to those who are accused to protect their rights. Complaints and the accused can both be individuals or groups. Internal investigations of the allegations are required by law and must be conducted in a timely, thorough manner.

Designating a staff member, such as the head of the Human Resources (HR) Department, to serve as the institution’s Title IX coordinator is helpful. A coordinator can help ensure consistency for reporting procedures and investigations. This person can work with other staff members to monitor the environment for any situations that could be viewed as discriminatory.

Other staff members can be involved by joining committees organized to set up anti-discrimination and harassment training, to design new, inclusive programs, and to conduct follow-through on complaints of alleged discrimination. Groups can also be organized to rewrite the policies and share the information with staff and students.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Schools Remain Compliant With Anti-Discrimination Policies

Staying compliant with Title IX and other anti-discrimination policies is the safest way to protect students and staff. If you are encountering problems with harassment or a flawed anti-harassment policy, contact a Philadelphia employment lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Complete an online form or call 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

How can Small Businesses Avoid Lawsuits?

By anthony, 12th July 2021

One of the most essential ways to keep a small business running well is to do everything possible to limit risk. Neglecting to avoid risk could lead to business tort litigation. It could only take one lawsuit to put a small company out of business and leave the owner struggling with significant debt. Understanding the ways to prevent lawsuits is a must for every small business owner.

Separate From the Business

Business owners can protect their interests by separating themselves from their companies, which can be accomplished in several ways. Some individuals establish their businesses as sole proprietorships, but that is not always the right answer. If the company is sued, the owner’s personal assets could still be at risk in a lawsuit. Incorporating the business might be better. That way, the owner’s personal wealth and assets are shielded.

Another option is to run the business through a trust. When a trust is set up properly, it can protect the owner’s assets if the business is sued. A business owner can set up a trust with the help from a knowledgeable lawyer. Small business owners can benefit by having experienced legal guidance.

Have Clear Policies and Procedures

Small business owners need to create clear policies and procedures for employees. Employment laws change often, so staying informed and having an up-to-date employee handbook is the way to go. Workers must be instructed on how to handle certain situations, like alleged workplace discrimination and workplace injuries. The business owner should be well-prepared.

All employment contracts should be drafted properly, and a qualified lawyer can help. Small business owners may not be versed in the correct legal terminology and could put themselves at risk by using faulty contracts. Having a friend, family member, or business associate help write an important contract can lead to serious problems down the road.

Accurate recordkeeping is another key preventative measure. This includes having important documents prepared through a lawyer’s guidance, with times, dates, and signatures on agreements. All of the details in company communications should be recorded carefully and checked for accuracy. Emails, texts, phone calls, and transactions between companies and their employees and customers should also be documented. When business is brisk, some small business may try to cut corners with their recordkeeping, which is a mistake.

Computer Security

Since most businesses work extensively on computers, their systems need to be safeguarded. Losing important files could be devastating and could prevent a company from operating. Not being able to produce important evidence could be damaging to a legal case as well. A failure to operate might prevent the small business from living up to some of their contractual obligations or agreements.

Business computer systems should be backed up using the latest technologies. Files should be backed up monthly, weekly, and daily. Virus protection is another important concern since viruses can wipe out computer systems and steal files. Security software and current anti-virus measures should be used. Important hard copies of documents should be duplicated as well.

Appropriately Address Customer Issues

Customers will be dissatisfied from time to time, and they need to be handled with care. Angry customers who feel as though they have been seriously mistreated may attempt to escalate their claims. Small business owners must make every effort to be ethical in their dealings and to provide excellent customer service. When customers believe that they have been treated fairly, they are less likely to sue when something goes awry. Consistent good service is one of the best ways to avoid lawsuits.

Mistakes will happen, and the owner and staff should be trained on how to handle these situations in advance. Communicating openly and presenting options are both ways to calm customers down. Additionally, everything should be thoroughly documented. If the customer and business owner comes to an agreement, it should be written, dated, signed, and recorded.

Have an Insurance Policy

Even when small business owners are incorporated or establish trusts, insurance is still a necessity. A liability policy could protect the company if a customer or employee alleges that they were hurt in the place of business. When the business has a formal board of directors, these individuals may also want their own liability insurance policies to protect their personal assets.

Liability protection can also be built into contracts. For example, a clause could specify that if an uncontrollable event made it impossible for the company to fulfill their end of a contract, the business owner would not be liable for incomplete work. These insurance options can minimize the chance of being sued.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Small Business Owners Protect Their Interests

Taking precautions can minimize the chance of being sued. Having legal representation in your corner is one of the best ways to protect your small business. If you need help with business matters, speak to one of our Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. For an initial consultation, complete our online form or call us at 215-574-0600. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Can Schools Require Vaccinations?

By , 7th July 2021

With nationwide Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccinations currently underway, schools might be adjusting their operations. However, what happens when schools insist that everyone needs to be vaccinated before they enter the buildings? Parents and teachers are looking for straightforward answers, but much will depend on where they live.

States have different vaccination requirements for their schools, and some immunizations are already mandated, such as measles, mumps, rubella, and polio. However, some experts believe that a majority of the states will require that children and staff get vaccinated. Exemptions also come into play in some states for religious, philosophical, and personal reasons.

In some states, teachers and school staff were placed on priority lists and many have already been vaccinated. Some employees may be able to obtain exemptions if mandatory vaccination requirements are enforced. The employer would possibly need to make a reasonable accommodation for the employee. Along the same lines, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 could exempt teachers from getting vaccinated because of sincerely-held religious beliefs, observances, or practices.

Should Schools Require COVID-19 Vaccinations?

School administrators may feel that having unvaccinated students and staff members in their buildings imposes undue hardships. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) previously noted that COVID-19 presents a direct threat to the health and safety of people. This could increase the likelihood of schools mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for staff and students, but more state and federal guidance is needed.

While employers and schools may be able to require the vaccine, it is not recommended, as it can open the institutions up for complex litigation. It is recommended that employers tread carefully regarding mandated vaccinations among employees.

Reopening Schools

A moan goal is to create a more effective, centralized strategy for reopening schools. For now, states and school districts may want to communicate openly with their employees and students to see how well the responses to COVID-19 related safety measures have been. Demographics, risk factors, and concerns about the vaccine could all be explored in depth before further measures are taken.

Additionally, many people are still unsure if they wanted to get vaccinated, and this could foreshadow what happens in the coming months. Also, COVID-19 vaccine-related lawsuits may be possible when employers mandate that their employees show proof that they were vaccinated in order to be permitted to return to work.

Employers can do their part to encourage employees to get vaccinated and may even be able to assist with distribution. Communicating important facts about the vaccine to employees and sharing information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) can help. Some employees can also tie in the vaccine into employee wellness programs. Incentives could also be offered, which could drive up the vaccination rates.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help School Administrators, Staff, and Families Navigate COVID-19 Vaccination Requirements

Now that many people are receiving vaccinations, many are left wondering if businesses and schools will require vaccinations. If you have concerns about a COVID-19 requirement, a Philadelphia employment lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help. Employers should tread carefully when requiring vaccinations, and employees should understand their rights as well. For a confidential, initial consultation, complete our online form or call us at 215-574-0600. We are conveniently located in Philadelphia, and we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Scope Narrowed on Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

By anthony, 29th June 2021

The U.S. Supreme Court took much of the sting out of the 1986 U.S. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) by clearly ruling on what exceeds authorized access to proprietary computer systems. A divided court on June 3, 2021 ruled in favor of the defendant in Van Buren v. United States by ruling that accessing authorized areas of a proprietary computer system or database does not violate the CFAA.

The 11^th Circuit previously upheld a lower federal court’s ruling of a CFAA violation against the defendant, who was a police sergeant at the time of the alleged crime. The defendant allegedly accepted $5,000 to obtain and share information on another person via a law enforcement database. The defendant had full access to the information due to their law enforcement duties as a sergeant.

The employer filed a CFAA complaint against the defendant and argued that they were not authorized to look up the information and share it. A lower court found the defendant guilty, and the 11^th Circuit upheld the ruling upon appeal.

Organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed briefs supporting the U.S. Supreme Court accepting the case. The Electronic Frontier Foundation argued the CFAA is vague and overly broad, which enables abuse of the exceeds authorized access prohibition. It says virtually anyone who goes online could become a criminal by unknowingly violating terms of service for a website, database, or other informational sources.

Exceeds Authorized Access Clearly Defined

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in order to clarify just what qualifies as exceeds authorized access. It clearly determined that authorized access generally refers to anything the authorized person could access any file or document for virtually any purpose. If the file, folder, database, or other information source is open and available to the worker, they are authorized to access it.

A worker or other person only can exceed authorized access by going where they are not supposed to go. Any file, document, database, or other information that is off-limits to the worker and cannot normally be accessed. Doing so would be a clear case of exceeding authorized access and would be a violation of the CFAA, the Court ruled.

CFAA violations could carry very severe financial penalties and imprisonment of up to five years for each count. Repeat violations are punishable by up to 10 years per violation, and extreme cases that might involve criminal computer system hacking and similar bad acts could be punished by up to life in prison. For help with complex litigation regarding CFAA violations, an individual should speak to a lawyer.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Clients Understand CFAA Violations

If you accessed information that is available to you through a normal part of your job and with full access privileges in place, the Supreme Court ruling says that is not a CFAA violation. You would have to access information that normally is off-limits to actually exceed the authorized limits of your informational access. If you are accused of a CFAA violation, a Philadelphia employment lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help devise the best possible defense. Contact us online or call us 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Should I be Paid for My Summer Internship?

By , 16th June 2021

Internships are almost always a win-win. Employers get needed help and potential future hires, while the intern gets valuable work experience that looks great on a resume. It may not be common knowledge that legal guidelines stipulate whether an internship must be paid or unpaid, but there are. Therefore, anyone considering an internship should know if their position qualifies for a paycheck.

After years of study of internships, the U.S. Department of Labor realized that many employers take advantage of interns by not paying them. While interns often volunteer to work for free, they should not do this if they legally should be paid. According to guidelines under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):

Interns in a qualifying paid position must earn at least the federal minimum wage for internships in the for-profit or private sector.
They also must be paid overtime.

What Criteria Do Interns Have to Meet to be Paid?

The FLSA specifies criteria to determine whether the intern is a trainee who does not need to be paid or an employee that must be paid at least the federal minimum wage:

Intern does not replace regular employees but works under close supervision of existing staff.
Employer and intern both clearly understand there is no expectation of compensation during or at the end of the internship.
Internship is similar to training that would be given in an educational environment despite occurring in the employer’s facility.
Internship accommodates the intern’s schedule and commitments, such as school attendance.
Internship benefits the intern and their formal education; it ties in coursework or provides academic credit.
Internship is limited to the actual time the intern is provided beneficial learning.

If the internship meets all the criteria above, the FLSA does not consider it to be an employment relationship. Employers are then exempt from paying the minimum wage and overtime. While the criteria are open to interpretation, employers who do not want to pay their interns must provide skills and opportunities that truly benefit them.

Moral and Ethical Considerations

While the law provides legal guidelines regarding payment for internships, there are moral and ethical considerations too. Many studies show that paid interns are loyal and happy interns. They are often more enthusiastic, often hoping to be hired. Interns will also feel valuable if they are earning a paycheck and be more willing to contribute. Additionally, paying is good for the employer as well; they can set the intern’s schedule and the number of work hours.

Ethical considerations come into play as well. Employers must consider the intern’s responsibilities. Are they getting an authentic educational experience with a valuable mentor-mentee relationship, or are they making copies and getting coffee? If the intern’s work contributes in any way to the company’s successful operations, they should be paid.

An employer who expects an intern to work many hours for free or does not give them a valuable educational experience should not hire the intern to begin with. Interns should not be considered free labor. Instead, they should be regarded as contributing members of a work team that deserve to be paid for their time and effort.

The FLSA guidelines regarding internships are not easily enforced, and some employers are not even aware of them. Many interns are willing to work for free. However, when they do, the employer has the moral responsibility to give them a significant learning and skill-building experience that will benefit them in their future careers.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Protect Interns’ Rights to Fair Pay

Interns and employees have rights under the law. Wage and hour issues are common among those who contact the Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. We have helped numerous employees get fair and just treatment in the workplace. For an initial consultation about your case, contact us online or call us at 215-574-0600. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

What are the Differences Between Non-Compete and Non-Solicitation Agreements?

By , 9th June 2021

Every business owner, executive, manager, and employee has heard of or even signed a non-solicitation or non-compete agreement. These documents are common pieces of employment agreements and offer letters. Understanding the differences between these agreements and their enforceability makes achieving business goals easier.

Both of these agreements are restrictive covenants. That means each party agrees to be restricted by the terms contained in the agreement or clauses of the contract. However, just because the parties agree, does not mean a court will automatically uphold the restrictions in the document.

Non-Compete Agreements

As a business, a non-compete is often the more difficult of the two restrictive covenants to enforce. This is the case because the business has a high burden to prove unfair competition. To enforce a non-compete, the company must show that a former employee has confidential information about the business interests, and the company has restricted the employee from working for a competitor for a reasonable period of time and in a reasonable geographic area. Absent this proof by the company, enforcing a non-compete presents difficulty. Ultimately, it is up to a court to decide the reasonableness of the restrictions placed on the former employee.

That does not mean all hope is lost. In many cases, a court will modify the non-compete to be less restrictive to the former employee while still protecting legitimate business interests. An important point to note about non-compete agreements and clauses is that they should only apply to employees. Any business that attempts to use a non-compete with an independent contractor may face an audit and be subject to fines and penalties from the government for employee misclassification.

Non-Solicitation Agreements

A non-solicitation agreement restricts a former employee in a different way. They cannot solicit any existing, prospective, and sometimes former clients to come work with them at their new company. While easier to enforce than a non-compete, there are still challenges.

The biggest of these enforcement challenges is that the business must prove that a former employee solicited an existing, prospective, or former client to leave. Businesses are not often aware of the specific reason why a client leaves, making enforcement difficult but not impossible.

Possible Clauses

To help businesses understand the distinction between these restrictive covenants, there are key pieces that may help a company enforce these clauses. The exact needs of every business will vary. For that reason, and to have a complete understanding and review of a company’s restrictive covenants, it is advisable to speak with a skilled business lawyer.

For non-compete terms::

Restrict the former employee to working in a similar position with a client or competitor.
Only restrict the former employee within a geographic area around the company’s office.
Lift restrictions after a reasonable period of time, such as two years.

For non-solicitation terms:

Restrict the former employee from soliciting existing and potential clients and current employees.
Limit the restriction to no more than two years.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Clients with Non-Compete and Non-Solicit Agreements

If your business is facing non-compliance from current or former employees, or if you want to understand whether your restrictive covenants are enforceable, we can help. Your business is important to you, and you need guidance you can trust. The Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help you with your business needs. Contact us online or call us at 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Newer
1
…
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
…
78
Older

1101 Market Street Suite 2700, Philadelphia, PA 19107