Philadelphia Business Lawyers: Pittsburgh Paid Sick Leave Act Ruled Invalid

By ,

Less than six months after being signed into law, the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County has ruled that the Paid Sick Leave Act is invalid and unenforceable. The law required employers to provide employees a minimum of one hour of paid sick time per thirty-five hours worked, with the minimum accrual dependent upon the number of employees.

Plaintiffs claimed that the city does not have the authority to enact the ordinance under what is known as the “Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law”. This law states that a “home rule municipality, such as Pittsburgh, ‘shall not determine duties, responsibilities or requirements placed upon businesses, occupations and employers’ unless expressly provided by statutes”.  The Court determined that the Act did just that, in violation of the Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law. As a result of this case, companies with operations in Pittsburgh need not update their sick and paid leave policies.

For more information, call Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green at 215-574-0600 or contact us online.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers: “Cadillac Tax” Delayed until 2020

By ,

On December 18, 2015, President Obama approved a spending and tax package that includes a two-year delay of the so-called “Cadillac Tax”. This tax will impose a forty percent excise tax group health plans to the extent their total annual premium costs exceed $10,200 for single coverage and $27,500 for family coverage. This tax is intended to motivate employers and carriers to find a way to reduce the costs of employee health coverage.

For more information, call Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green at 215-574-0600 or contact us online.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers: Elements of Defamation in Pennsylvania

By ,

Defamation is a tort that holds individuals liable for false statements, spoken or written, which harm the reputation of another.  In general, a defamation complaint must be sufficient to identify the accused defamer and outline the circumstances of the publication of the false statements.  The tort protects public figures as well as private individuals and is interpreted under state law.  The statute of limitations is one year for bringing an action for defamation.

In Pennsylvania, the elements of the tort are outlined in the Uniform Single Publication Act (USPA).  The burden is initially on the Plaintiff to prove each element: 1. The defamatory character of the communication, 2. Its publication by the Defendant, 3. Its application to the Plaintiff, 4. The recipient’s understanding of its defamatory meaning, 5. The recipient’s understanding of it as intended to be applied to the Plaintiff, 6. Special harm resulting to the Plaintiff from the publication (actual damages that are economic or pecuniary). 7. Abuse of a conditionally privileged occasion (the publication was not reasonably necessary due to common interests).

For more information, call Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green at 215-574-0600 or contact us online.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers: Aetna Kickback Lawsuit

By ,

EDPA Denies Defendant BlueWave Healthcare Consultants’ Motion to Dismiss, Allowing Aetna’s Doctor Kickback Suit to Continue

On December 29, 2015, U.S. District Judge Robert F. Kelly of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied BlueWave Healthcare Consultants, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss a lawsuit brought by Plaintiff Aetna alleging Defendants paid doctors kickbacks to order unnecessary blood tests. Aetna alleges that BlueWave referred physicians in the Aetna network and told them they would be paid to refer blood samples to Defendant Health Diagnostics Laboratory, Inc. According to Aetna, BlueWave received approximately $200 million in commissions after entering into a sales agreement with Health Diagnostics Laboratory.

BlueWave argued in its Motion that Aetna failed to allege that BlueWave said anything false, one of the elements of fraud, as well as arguing that it was not liable for fraud because it was Health Diagnostics Laboratory that submitted the false bills to Aetna. However, Judge Kelly stated that under Pennsylvania common law, a person may be liable for fraud by merely participating in the scheme.  “Thus, the current Pennsylvania law places no requirement on plaintiff to prove that BlueWave defendants directly sent the false claims to Aetna,” Kelly said. “Rather, plaintiff has the burden to prove, amongst the other requirements required for fraud, that BlueWave defendants ‘participated in’ the perpetration of a fraudulent act.”

For more information, call Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green at 215-574-0600 or contact us online.

Philadelphia Wage and Hour Lawyers: Lawsuit Against Merck for Unpaid Overtime

By ,

Pharmaceutical giant, Merck & Co., is currently involved in an employment class action lawsuit for allegedly violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. The plaintiffs include 26 full time employees from the company’s pilot plant in Rahway, New Jersey. The lawsuit claims that the employees were not compensated for the extra 45 minutes they were required to work every day before their shift officially started. In addition, the company allegedly retaliated against the employees’ complaints by threatening to close the plant and take further disciplinary actions against the employees if they continued to protest the unpaid work.

The lawsuit alleges that the overtime work responsibilities were exactly the same as those performed during the regular shift, and that the additional 45 minutes per day added up to 3.75 hours per week of unpaid overtime work.

Philadelphia Wage and Hour Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Represents Employees in Overtime Claims Lawsuits

The Fair Labor Standards Act, and other state laws, protect employees’ rights to receive compensation for overtime hours worked. If your rights have been violated by your employer and you have not received the payment you deserve for hours worked, contact Philadelphia wage and hour lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green so that we may examine the details of your case and pursue the best course of action on your behalf. For a confidential consultation, call our offices at 215-574-0600 or contact us online.

 

 

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers: Dental Practice Lawsuit for Sexual Harassment

By ,

Employees of an Atlantic City dental practice have filed a lawsuit in Superior Court, alleging that two male co-workers subjected them to sexual harassment. The group of current and former employees claim that their co-workers made unwanted sexual advances, inappropriate comments and touched them without their consent. According to the lawsuit, the dental practice where they worked functioned as a “sexual harassment playground.”

The female employees assert that they were required to submit to these unwanted sexual advances or they would face adverse employment consequences. They claim that submitting to the sexual harassment was a condition of their employment and any employees that did not comply were either punished or ignored.

According to the lawsuit, the owners of the dental practice were complicit with the harassment. The employees assert that the owners were fully aware of the male employees’ actions, and even went so far as to retaliate against female employees who complained about the harassment. According to the plaintiffs, the owners responded to complaints of sexual harassment with termination, disparate treatment and increased scrutiny of complaining employees.

The plaintiffs have requested a jury trial. They are seeking money damages, attorney’s fees, and the costs of the lawsuit.

Sexual harassment is one of the most well known types of employment discrimination. Unfortunately, sexual harassment in the workplace is an all too common matter. If you believe that you are the victim of sexual harassment and your employer has not protected you from mistreatment, you may be entitled to take legal action.

Philadelphia Sexual Harassment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Protect the Civil Rights of Employees

As the victim of sexual harassment, you may feel powerless, frightened and vulnerable. However, sexual harassment on the job need not be tolerated. An experienced Philadelphia sexual harassment lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green can help you to protect your job, stop the harassment or seek money damages. Our experienced attorneys stay on the cutting edge of recent litigation and have a thorough understanding of how the courts define sexual harassment. Speak to a lawyer today to help you determine the best course of action for your case. We will advocate zealously on your behalf to protect your rights. With offices in Philadelphia, we represent clients in Philadelphia and South Jersey. Call us at 215-574-0600 or fill out an online contact form today.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers Discuss Pending Legislation to Attract Corporations to Pennsylvania

By ,

A bill was recently passed in the House of Representatives that proposes giving Pennsylvania’s Superior Court and county courts the authority to establish commerce court divisions in Pennsylvania. The commerce division would utilize two of the court’s fifteen judges and three senior judges with jurisdiction over business cases – including corporate acquisitions, mergers, dissolution, liquidations or other matters concerning corporations, as well as limited liability companies, trusts, sole proprietorships and corporate partnerships.

Pennsylvania court officials have agreed to institute a pilot program if the bill, sponsored by State Representative Seth M. Grove, R-York, passes in the Senate. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Stuart Greenleaf said that he plans to propose his own more expansive legislation, which proposes an entirely new independent business court. He has stated that the costs of this new court would be offset by the benefit to the state’s economy. Greenleaf reports that his legislation has been in the works for several months and he plans to introduce it soon.

These proposals are aimed at making Pennsylvania more hospitable for businesses. Representative Grove’s bill seeks to imitate the model of Delaware’s Chancery Court, which has helped make Delaware the nation’s business capital. More than one million businesses and half of all publicly traded U.S. companies are registered in Delaware. Businesses are drawn to Delaware because its Chancery Court offers quick resolution of conflicts and certainty of outcomes.

Delaware’s Chancery Court handles shareholder lawsuits, disputes between board members, challenges to mergers and acquisitions and other civil matters. Cases in the Chancery Court are decided by judges, not juries, and a written opinion is issued for each case. These opinions provide a body of case law that can aid litigants in resolving their cases.

Critics of Pennsylvania’s plan argue that the bill is unnecessary because Pennsylvania courts already have the power to create specialized court programs, such as a commerce division. For example, we have seen programs spring up to address criminal charges against veterans and the mentally ill. Philadelphia and Allegheny Counties, where most of the state’s business disputes occur, already have divisions dedicated to addressing these types of cases.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Represent Clients in Business Transactions and Contract Disputes

Philadelphia trial lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green provide traditional trial work, contract work, as well as counseling, planning and advice to all forms of businesses. Our attorneys keep up with fast paced developments in the law to provide your business with effective legal representation. With offices in Philadelphia, we represent clients in Philadelphia and South Jersey. Call us at 215-574-0600 or fill out an online contact form today.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers: Sizeable Settlement for Colorado Sexual Harassment Victims

By ,

A Colorado potato packing plant has settled a lawsuit alleging a history of sexual harassment. According to the suit, female employees were subjected to sexual harassment at the MountainKing Potatoes plant in Monte Vista, CO for more than a decade. The plant’s operators will distribute a sum of $415,000 among 13 employees represented in the suit, and an additional $35,000 to cover legal fees for Colorado Legal Services, who helped some of the women file their complaints.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed the lawsuit against Smokin’ Spuds, Inc. and Farming Technology, Inc. on behalf of four female employees, alleging that a male supervisor had harassed women at the plant since 2001. The 13 employees in the suit were subjected to repeated inappropriate touching, lewd comments and propositions. The suit also claims that three of the women were fired after complaining about the harassment.

The supervisor was terminated as part of the settlement and the plant’s operators will provide discrimination law training and post signs notifying workers of their rights. They have also sent letters of apology to each of the women involved in the suit.

EEOC Increases Efforts to Protect Agricultural Workers

Agricultural workers seem to be at high risk for this type of harassment, as many are not aware of their rights and cannot afford legal representation. The MountainKing suit is one of several recent harassment cases in growing and packing facilities across the United States, including a $17 million settlement involving a produce packing operation in Florida. These cases seem to disproportionately affect immigrant women who cannot advocate for themselves, either because of a language barrier or simply because they do not know what resources are available to them.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Protect Rights of Sexual Harassment Victims

Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green handle all types of employment discrimination and harassment cases. We will give your case the personal attention you deserve and prepare a sound legal strategy to aggressively defend your rights. With offices conveniently located in Philadelphia, we help victims of sexual harassment throughout Southeastern Pennsylvania and South Jersey. Call us today at 215-574-0600 or contact us online to review your case with a knowledgeable sexual harassment lawyer.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers: Benefits of Alternative Dispute Resolution

By ,

Relationships inside the boardroom are not unlike those encountered in everyday life. Petty squabbles and hurt feelings can occur in business just as they do in a friendship or in marriage. Unlike personal relationships, however, commercial disputes between vendor and supplier or hostility between board members can sink deals and jeopardize long-term fiscal growth. When business entities are at an impasse and litigation seems likely, the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) can prove beneficial, Philadelphia business transactions lawyers say.

Alternative dispute resolution in a business context traces its roots to family law, where couples found success navigating the emotional minefield of divorce by resolving – collectively – to stay out of the courtroom. The same principles apply in commercial disputes. Just as divorcing spouses must find a way to move forward and effectively co-parent for the sake of their children, partners, board members and former clients often must continue to coexist for the sake of their respective businesses.

When parties agree to pursue alternative dispute resolution to resolve their business dispute, they must first retain lawyers trained in the alternative dispute resolution approach. Although counsel may be present at most meetings their role is largely supervisory. Allowing negotiations to be primarily conducted by the parties themselves helps ensure a settlement that all sides find satisfactory.

There are yet other advantages to alternative dispute resolution. Because parties are not pressured to assemble a team of lawyers nor pay court costs, ADR is a more economical approach to dispute resolution than litigation. Arbitration also presents a cost-savings over litigation, but the uncertainty of an arbitrator’s ultimate award may be untenable to some parties. Successful mediation, likewise, is dependent upon the skill and fairness of a mutually-agreed upon mediator.

Alternative dispute resolution, by contrast, offers participants greater control over the outcome – at less cost. Keeping a dispute out of the courtroom also helps ensure privacy, which can often be an issue when ownership of trade secrets or other confidential business information must be decided. ADR also helps repair and restore business relationships previously believed to be irreparably damaged, as parties work together to resolve their differences.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can Handle all Your Alternative Dispute Resolution Needs

Commercial disputes are common in the business world but often can be resolved without litigation. Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. are well-versed in alternative dispute resolution. Call 215-574-0600 or contact us online to learn more about how we can help your business move forward. At our Philadelphia offices, we proudly serve corporate clients throughout the surrounding areas.

Philadelphia Overtime Lawyers Discuss: Cleaning Company Sued for Violating FLSA

By ,

The owner of Heits Building Services of Central and Northern New Jersey is facing a federal lawsuit for violating labor laws at the expense of the company’s workers. Giuseppe Grammatico has been accused of selling “franchises” to individuals, then treating them like employees instead of independent contractors.

According to the lawsuit, Grammatico heads Grammatico Enterprises Inc. which provides cleaning services through Heits Building Services for customers around New Jersey. He has been charging workers $8,250 to acquire their own cleaning franchise and clean for his clients. However, rather than being treated as independent franchise owners, all monies and contracts were handled by Grammatico.

As pled in the lawsuit, Heits Building Services assigned contracts to franchise owners, collected payments from clients and paid workers their wages after taking a percentage for “management fees.” Workers were prohibited from contacting new clients and were also required to use cleaning products purchased from Heits. The suit also claims that workers did not receive overtime pay.

The lawsuit accuses Grammatico of implementing this particular business model to avoid paying fair wages and overtime. Grammatico denies this claim and purports that many other businesses classify franchises the same way. Moreover, the defendant asserts that his business model benefits franchise owners by providing them with the necessary training and support they need to be successful.

The Labor Department disagrees. In recent years, both federal and regional authorities such as New Jersey’s Wage and Hour Labor Division have grown increasingly aware of the uptrend in what is known as employee misclassification. The independent contractor misclassification is one of the most increasingly common type of labor violations. Employee misclassification deprives workers of wages and benefits and contributes to an unfair business advantage for companies that misclassify workers. If the Labor Department wins the lawsuit against Grammatico, affected workers should recover back wages for unpaid overtime and unpaid Social Security contributions.

Philadelphia Overtime Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Represent Employees in Fair Labor Violation Lawsuits

Our team of Philadelphia overtime lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green have represented employees in FLSA claims for unpaid overtime. Please call 215-574-0600 or contact us online today to schedule your consultation.