Category: Uncategorized

What Is the Difference Between a C Corporation and an S Corporation?

By ,

Business lawyers

When choosing a business structure, it is critical to decide between forming a C Corporation or an S Corporation. Both offer unique advantages, and the right choice can impact your taxes, ownership flexibility, and overall operations. Understanding the key differences between the two can help you make an informed decision that aligns with your business goals.

Ownership and Structure Differences

One of the primary distinctions between C Corporations and S Corporations lies in ownership restrictions and flexibility. A C Corporation allows for unlimited shareholders, including individuals, other corporations, or even foreign investors. This makes C Corporations an appealing choice for businesses looking to expand rapidly or seek outside investment.

In contrast, an S Corporation has stricter ownership rules. S Corporations can only have up to 100 shareholders, all of whom must be U.S. citizens or permanent residents. S Corporations are limited to one class of stock, while C Corporations can issue multiple classes. These restrictions can limit an S Corporation’s growth potential, but they also provide more control and simplicity.

Taxation Differences

Another significant difference between C Corporations and S Corporations is how they are taxed. C Corporations are subject to double taxation. This means the corporation is taxed on its profits, and then shareholders are taxed again on any dividends they receive. While this structure may seem burdensome, it provides more flexibility in retaining earnings within the business for future growth or investment.

S Corporations avoid double taxation. Instead, they are taxed as pass-through entities. This means that profits and losses pass through the corporation to the shareholders, who report them on their personal tax returns. The corporation itself does not pay income taxes at the corporate level. This tax advantage can make the S Corporation an appealing choice for smaller businesses or businesses with a limited number of shareholders.

However, while the pass-through taxation of S Corporations can reduce the overall tax burden, shareholders may still need to pay self-employment taxes on their income, which is something to consider when evaluating your options.

Management and Compliance Requirements

C Corporations and S Corporations also differ in terms of management structure and compliance obligations. C Corporations follow a traditional corporate structure, with a board of directors overseeing the company’s operations and officers handling day-to-day tasks. This structure often suits larger companies with complex operations, allowing for more division of responsibility and oversight.

While still required to have a board of directors and officers, S Corporations often have fewer formalities and reporting requirements than C Corporations. For example, C Corporations typically face more rigorous state and federal compliance requirements, such as holding annual meetings and filing extensive reports. S Corporations, by contrast, may have fewer reporting obligations, making them easier to manage for smaller businesses.

It is also important to note that S Corporations must adhere to specific IRS requirements to maintain their status. Failure to meet these requirements can result in the IRS revoking the S Corporation election, at which point the business will be taxed as a C Corporation.

A Philadelphia Business Lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Helps You Make Prudent Business Decisions

If you are still unsure about which business structure is right for you, consulting with an experienced business attorney can help. Speak with a Philadelphia business lawyer at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. to learn more. Contact us online or at 215-574-0600 to schedule a consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we proudly serve clients in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, including South Jersey.

  Category: Uncategorized
  Comments: Comments Off on What Is the Difference Between a C Corporation and an S Corporation?
  Other posts by

What Are Reasonable Accommodations for Employees With Disabilities?

By ,

Discrimination Lawyers

Navigating the workplace can be challenging, especially for employees with disabilities. Understanding your rights and the accommodations available to you can make a significant difference in your professional life. This blog will outline what constitutes reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities, providing clarity on how to ensure your workplace is accessible and supportive.

Understanding Reasonable Accommodations

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandates that employers provide reasonable accommodations to qualified employees with disabilities. But what exactly does this mean? Reasonable accommodations are adjustments or modifications that enable employees with disabilities to perform their job duties effectively. These accommodations must not cause undue hardship to the employer, which generally means they should not be overly costly or disruptive.

Types of Reasonable Accommodations

  • Physical Modifications: One of the most common types of accommodations involves making physical changes to the workplace. This can include installing ramps, modifying restrooms, rearranging workstations, or providing accessible parking spaces. These changes ensure that employees with mobility impairments can navigate the workplace with ease.
  • Assistive Technology: Employers may provide specialized equipment or software to assist employees with disabilities. For example, screen readers for visually impaired employees, voice recognition software for those with mobility impairments, or amplification devices for employees with hearing impairments. These tools help bridge the gap and allow employees to perform their tasks efficiently.
  • Modified Work Schedules: Flexibility in work hours can be a crucial accommodation. This might involve allowing an employee to work part-time, change their start or end times, or take breaks at different intervals. For employees with chronic health conditions, modified schedules can help manage medical appointments and fatigue.
  • Job Restructuring: Employers may need to modify job responsibilities or reassign tasks to accommodate an employee’s disability. This does not mean reducing job expectations but rather finding ways to redistribute tasks that an employee may find difficult to perform due to their disability. For example, an employee with a back condition might be excused from heavy lifting tasks and instead focus on administrative duties.
  • Leave Policies: Providing additional unpaid leave can also be a reasonable accommodation. This might be necessary for employees who need time off for medical treatment or recovery. Employers should ensure that their leave policies are flexible enough to accommodate these needs without penalizing the employee.
  • Telecommuting: With advancements in technology, telecommuting has become a viable option for many employees. Allowing an employee to work from home can be an effective accommodation for those with disabilities that make commuting or working in a traditional office environment challenging.

Requesting Reasonable Accommodations

If you believe you need a reasonable accommodation, the first step is to inform your employer. You do not need to use any specific language, but it is helpful to make your request in writing. Be clear about the nature of your disability and the specific accommodation you need. Providing medical documentation can support your request, although employers are limited in what they can ask for regarding your medical condition.

Employers’ Obligations and Employees’ Rights

Employers must engage in an interactive process with the employee to identify a suitable accommodation. This process involves open communication between the employer and the employee, exploring various options, and finding a solution that works for both parties. It is important to note that while employers must provide reasonable accommodations, they are not required to provide the exact accommodation requested by the employee. As long as the accommodation provided is effective, it meets the legal requirement.

Employees have the right to a work environment that does not discriminate based on disability. If an employer denies a reasonable accommodation or retaliates against an employee for requesting one, the employee may have grounds for a legal claim under the ADA.

Ensuring Workplace Accessibility

Creating an inclusive workplace is beneficial for both employees and employers. Reasonable accommodations not only support employees with disabilities but also enhance overall workplace morale and productivity. Employers should proactively review their policies and practices to ensure they are effectively accommodating employees with disabilities.

For employees, understanding their rights and knowing how to request accommodations can empower them to thrive in their roles. Do not hesitate to seek the accommodations you need to perform your job effectively.

The Philadelphia Discrimination Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Protect Your Rights

If you are experiencing difficulties obtaining reasonable accommodations in your workplace or if you believe your rights under the ADA have been violated, it is important to seek legal guidance. Speak with the Philadelphia discrimination lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. about how we can help you. Contact us online or at 215-574-0600 to schedule a consultation. With an office in Philadelphia, we proudly serve clients in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, including South Jersey.

  Category: Uncategorized
  Comments: Comments Off on What Are Reasonable Accommodations for Employees With Disabilities?
  Other posts by

Pennsylvania Enacts Anti-SLAPP Statute

By ,

Lawsuits

On July 17, 2024, Pennsylvania enacted a significant piece of legislation aimed at protecting free speech and public participation—Act 72. This new anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute marks a pivotal development in the Commonwealth’s legal landscape. The Act offers robust defenses against lawsuits designed to silence or intimidate individuals exercising their First Amendment rights.

What Is an Anti-SLAPP Statute?

Pennsylvania Act 72 of 2024 establishes legal protections for individuals and entities facing lawsuits that are intended primarily to chill or deter their participation in matters of public interest. These types of lawsuits, known as SLAPPs, are often employed by plaintiffs to stifle criticism or dissent through the threat of costly litigation.

The Act aims to address this issue by providing a legal framework that allows defendants to quickly dismiss SLAPP suits and recover associated legal costs, thereby reinforcing the protection of free speech and public discourse.

Key Provisions of Pennsylvania Act 72

  • Definition of SLAPP Suits

Act 72 defines SLAPP suits as legal actions filed primarily to suppress or discourage public participation or the exercise of free speech on matters of public concern. This includes any claim made in response to statements or activities related to public issues, governmental proceedings, or the exercise of First Amendment rights.

  • Early Dismissal Mechanism

The statute introduces a mechanism for early dismissal of SLAPP suits. Defendants can file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit at an early stage, arguing that the claim arises from protected activity. If the court determines that the lawsuit qualifies as a SLAPP suit, it must be dismissed promptly.

  • Burden of Proof

Act 72 shifts the burden of proof to the plaintiff. Once a defendant demonstrates that the lawsuit relates to protected activity, the plaintiff must show that their claim has merit and is not merely intended to suppress free speech. This provision aims to prevent the misuse of the legal system to intimidate or silence defendants.

  • Attorney’s Fees and Costs

A significant feature of Act 72 is the provision for awarding attorney’s fees and costs to defendants who successfully demonstrate that they are the victims of a SLAPP suit. This aims to mitigate the financial burden on individuals defending against meritless lawsuits and discourages plaintiffs from filing such actions.

  • Judicial Review and Appeals

The Act also provides for expedited judicial review of motions to dismiss SLAPP suits. This ensures that the court can quickly determine whether the lawsuit meets the criteria for dismissal under Act 72. Additionally, it allows for appeals if a party disagrees with the court’s ruling on a SLAPP motion.

  • No Impact on Other Remedies

Importantly, Act 72 does not limit or affect other legal remedies available to parties in disputes. It is designed to supplement, rather than replace, existing protections and remedies under the law.

Pennsylvania’s 2024 Act 72 anti-SLAPP statute marks a significant step forward in safeguarding free speech and public participation. By providing mechanisms for early dismissal of meritless lawsuits and awarding legal costs to defendants, the Act strengthens protections against attempts to suppress public discourse.

Take Action: Contact Our Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C.

Don’t let your voice be silenced. If you believe you are facing a SLAPP suit, contact Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. to learn how Pennsylvania’s new Act 72 can protect you. Reach out for a consultation, and let us help you defend your right to free speech. Call our Philadelphia employment lawyers at 215-574-0600 or contact us online. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, including South Jersey.

  Category: Uncategorized
  Comments: Comments Off on Pennsylvania Enacts Anti-SLAPP Statute
  Other posts by

How to File Your Beneficial Ownership Information Report

By ,

Beneficial Ownership Information Report

As a business owner in Pennsylvania, it is crucial to understand the steps and obligations involved in filing your Beneficial Ownership Information Report. This report is essential for compliance with regulations to combat financial crimes such as money laundering and fraud.

Understanding Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting

Beneficial ownership refers to individuals who directly or indirectly own or control a significant portion of a company. Under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), certain businesses are required to disclose their beneficial owners to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). This act aims to enhance transparency and prevent illicit activities by ensuring that law enforcement agencies have access to accurate information about company ownership.

Identifying Beneficial Owners

The first step in filing your Beneficial Ownership Information Report is identifying the individuals who qualify as beneficial owners. According to the CTA, a beneficial owner is any individual who:

  • Owns 25 percent or more of the company’s equity interests.
  • Exercises substantial control over the company through direct or indirect means.

It is essential to thoroughly review your company’s ownership structure to accurately identify all beneficial owners. This includes evaluating both direct and indirect ownership stakes. Once identified, you must gather the necessary information for each beneficial owner, which typically includes:

  • Full legal name
  • Date of birth
  • Current residential address
  • A unique identifying number from an acceptable identification document (e.g., passport, driver’s license)

Preparing and Submitting the Report

Once you have identified and gathered the required information for the beneficial owners, you can prepare the Beneficial Ownership Information Report. Here are the steps to follow:

  • Use the FinCEN Reporting System: FinCEN provides an online portal for submitting Beneficial Ownership Information Reports. Access the portal and create an account if you do not already have one.
  • Complete the Report: Fill out the required fields in the report, ensuring the accuracy and completeness of the information provided. Pay close attention to details; errors or omissions can lead to penalties and delays.
  • Submit the Report: Once complete, submit it through the FinCEN portal. Keep a copy of the confirmation receipt for your records. The confirmation receipt serves as proof of submission and may be necessary for future reference.

Maintaining Compliance

Filing the Beneficial Ownership Information Report is not a one-time task. It is vital to maintain ongoing compliance by updating the report whenever there are changes in the beneficial ownership structure. This includes any changes in ownership percentages or the addition or removal of beneficial owners. To ensure compliance, adopt the following practices:

  • Regular Reviews: Periodically review your company’s ownership structure to identify any changes that require updates to the Beneficial Ownership Information Report.
  • Timely Updates: Submit updated reports within 30 days of any change in beneficial ownership. Failure to do so can result in penalties.
  • Record Keeping: Maintain detailed records of all beneficial ownership information and report submissions. This documentation is critical for demonstrating compliance during audits or investigations.

Penalties for Non-Compliance

Failing to file the Beneficial Ownership Information Report or providing inaccurate information can lead to severe penalties. These penalties may include:

  • Monetary Fines: Non-compliance can result in substantial fines imposed by regulatory authorities.
  • Criminal Charges: Criminal charges may be filed against the responsible parties in cases of willful non-compliance or fraudulent reporting.
  • Reputational Damage: Non-compliance can harm your business’s reputation, affecting relationships with clients, partners, and regulators.

Our Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Will Help You Manage Your Business Correctly

Filing your Beneficial Ownership Information Report is an essential regulatory requirement for business owners in Pennsylvania. By understanding the steps involved and diligently maintaining compliance, you can protect your business from potential penalties and contribute to the fight against financial crimes. For more information and assistance with your Beneficial Ownership Information Report, speak with our Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online to schedule a consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we proudly serve clients in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, including South Jersey.

  Category: Uncategorized
  Comments: Comments Off on How to File Your Beneficial Ownership Information Report
  Other posts by

What Qualifies as a Business Tort?

By ,

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Can Help You With Business Tort Litigation.

Whenever a conflict arises that causes harm to a business, a business tort could exist. Many business conflicts could endanger your business. The harm could be financial and threaten to close your business. The harm might even be the theft of trade secrets.

A business tort always involves the economic effects of wrongful acts that impact one or more businesses or other legal entities. Many begin with contract disputes that two or more parties cannot resolve. Then, lawsuits get filed in federal or state civil courts and sometimes both.

The plaintiff in a business tort must cite at least one cause of action for the lawsuit to proceed. A cause of action is comprised of legal facts that justify the lawsuit. Most business torts involve one or more of the following causes of action:

  • Tortious interference.
  • Injurious falsehood.
  • Restraint of trade.
  • Unfair competition.
  • Fraudulent misrepresentation.

Other causes of action also exist, and most business torts involve a combination. The plaintiff usually seeks a judgment for cash, property, or affirmation of a legal right.

Tortious Interference Affects Prior Business Relationships

Tortious interference happens when an offending party interferes with a business’ contractual relationships with others. The offending party might make it impossible for your business to complete a contractual obligation. When your business cannot perform its obligations, tortious interference might be a valid cause of action in a lawsuit.

Injurious Falsehood Explained

You likely understand the general concept of defamation. If another party spreads a malicious lie that damages your business’ brand reputation, an injurious falsehood occurs. Malice must be shown and refers to intentionally spreading a known falsehood with the intent to cause damage to your business’ brand reputation.

How Restraint of Trade Could Occur?

When an offending party does something that limits your amount of trade, sales, or delivery of goods or services, a restraint of trade happens. Whenever your business cannot continue normal operations due to the actions of other parties, a restraint of trade might be claimed as a cause of action.

Many Kinds of Unfair Competition

Unfair competition has potentially widely varying actions that could result in the cause of action triggering a civil suit. Stealing your trade secrets or using your intellectual property to siphon away some of your market shares are examples of unfair competition. The unfair competition gives the offending party greater leverage to generate profit at your expense.

Fraudulent Misrepresentation Could Void Contracts

When one party intentionally lies in order to secure a business agreement, that is a form of fraudulent misrepresentation. The misrepresentation is done with the intent to deceive a business or an individual. It might involve contractual negotiations or other business dealings and could occur in many ways, including the omission of information.

Punitive Damages Might Be Sought

When a malicious act creates one or more legitimate causes of action that you could prove in court, the defendant might be subject to punitive damages. You would have to request punitive damages in a court filing or amend an existing case to request them. However, it is important to note that punitive damages are rare.

Philadelphia Business Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Can Help You With Business Tort Litigation

Our Philadelphia business lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help you explore your legal options when you must resolve a business dispute. Call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online to schedule an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Can Doctors Negotiate Their Contracts?

By ,

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Doctors Negotiate Their Contracts.

Until you sign a contract, anything is negotiable. It takes a lot of hard work and education to become a doctor, and it is very important that a contract reflects that hard work and advanced education that was needed to become a licensed medical professional.

Verbal agreements can help prevent some conflicts, but they have almost no legal weight. However, a written contract clearly outlines what is expected of both parties. If you are weighing the merits of a contract, the following tips could help you to decide how to proceed.

Commonly Negotiated Conditions in Contracts

Pay, work hours, and benefits are common elements of any work-related contract. However, a doctor could have many more considerations placed in a contract. If you recently completed medical school and have a significant amount of student loan debt, you might negotiate a partial payment from your employer.

Many doctors need to do more than see patients and consult with staff. Some doctors have administrative duties as well. A contract might determine the type of administrative services and the amount that you are expected to do while on the clock.

Many doctors also might be required to remain on call on particular days and at particular times, such as overnight. The contract clearly should outline the times and how frequently you might have to be on call to handle emergencies and demands of hospital staff.

Virtually every aspect of your contract to perform duties is negotiable. It helps greatly to understand exactly what the contract says and what it requires of you and your employer.

How Can a Lawyer Help With My Contract if I am a Doctor?

The majority of doctors are highly skilled at providing medical services but are not well-versed in contracts. An experienced lawyer can help review a pending contract. Your lawyer can clearly explain what the legal terms mean. Your lawyer can also explain how the proposed terms might affect your work, pay, or benefits. A lawyer can help you understand the proposals in the contract and how to make counteroffers as well.

Making mistakes and signing a substandard contract might lock you into a bad deal for years. A lawyer can help prevent that and will negotiate the best possible terms of the contract.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Doctors Negotiate Their Contracts

If you are a medical professional and need help with a contract, our experienced Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. can help. Call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online to schedule an initial consultation. We are located in Philadelphia, and we serve clients throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

What are the Top Issues for Non-Compete Agreements in 2021?

By ,

The last year saw non-compete agreements go through several transitions as much of the workforce shifted to a remote working environment. A new year does not mean those issues will go away, as employers are still struggling with how to deal with remote workers and the language of their non-compete clauses are gaining more scrutiny as a result. The clauses, in general, have garnered the attention of several federal and state governments. Many expect the coming year to bring more restrictions at the state level.

What are Non-Compete Clauses?

Non-compete clauses restrict an employee from going to work for a direct competitor until a certain period has passed. They protect the business from an ex-employee bringing trade secrets to a competitor. Non-competes provide a set time that the former employee is prohibited from moving to a competitor, although time is not always a factor. Some will include geographic restrictions as well as limiting what industries a person can go into after they leave a company.

In other words, a non-compete clause may limit a person from moving from one financial services firm to another in the same town within a few weeks of leaving their job.

What Issues are Associated with Non-Compete Clauses?

Some problems have arisen with non-compete agreements, such as the size and scope of these agreements, as well as the impact of remote work. Originally, the clauses would only limit former employees from moving to a competitor within a few weeks or months. However, over time, these provisions grow over just a few months. They can also change geographically to expand beyond the physical location of the company. In some cases, they have encompassed the entire country. These expansions have caused non-competes to come under scrutiny with opponents claiming that they unnecessarily limit a person’s ability to make a living.

Some states have also placed restrictions on what an employer can make a firm sign, while others have banned their use. Where it gets difficult for employers has to do with employees who are now working from home in a jurisdiction that might treat non-compete clauses differently than how the office’s jurisdiction handles them. The courts explained that the onus is on the employers to word their agreement in such a way that clarifies any discrepancies in jurisdictions.

How are States Handling Non-Compete Clauses?

Each state is handling non-compete clauses in their own unique way as some take an aggressive stance against them and others are more lenient. Some states will limit the geographic reason or the timeframe that an employer can use it in their agreements, while other states may not restrict or enforce these agreements.

What is in Store for These Agreements?

The federal government has made several attempts to pass legislation that would limit these agreements or outright ban them; however, those efforts have failed. Any restrictions on non-compete agreements will most likely come from individual states as pressure mounts on local governments to limit them. Those states that currently do not have anything on the books addressing non-competes will push to adopt something, especially if they do not see anything from the federal government.

Philadelphia Non-Compete Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Help Clients Understand Non-Compete Clauses

Whether you’re an employee or an employer, understanding your non-compete clause is essential. If you want to make sure you understand your legal rights pursuant to a non-compete cause, contact the Philadelphia non-compete lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. today. Contact us online or call 215-574-0600 for an initial consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout South Jersey and Pennsylvania.

  Category: Uncategorized
  Comments: Comments Off on What are the Top Issues for Non-Compete Agreements in 2021?
  Other posts by

Pa District Court Rules That Employer Who Paid Its Employees One-And-One-Half Times the Minimum Wage Rate Was Still Required to Pay Overtime Compensations

By ,

In Gonzalez v. Bustleton Service, Inc., the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that an employer who paid its employees one-and-one-half times the minimum wage was still obligated to pay overtime compensation. 2010 WL 1813487 (E.D.Pa. 2010). Plaintiffs were landscape laborers who worked for a varying hourly rate. The “base” wage for each employee ranged from $8.00 – $13.50, but when the Plaintiffs were working on jobs for a government entity that set the applicable wage rate (“prevailing wage jobs”), they were paid nearly double their hourly rate. When Plaintiffs were working on normal jobs and receiving their “base” wage, they were all paid overtime wages in accordance with the FLSA, but Employer failed to pay them overtime when they were working on a prevailing wage job.

Employer argued that the overtime compensation should be based on the employees’ “base” wages, and when the employees were working on the prevailing wage jobs, they were paid above the necessary 150% of their base wage. Plaintiffs’ on the other hand argued that overtime is based on the weighted average of the rates the employee received during the workweek. For example, when an employee worked two different types of work, and received a different hourly rate for each, the overtime rate should be calculated on the average between the two hourly rates.

The Court agreed with Plaintiffs’ arguments and found that the Plaintiffs’ calculation was in accordance with the governing regulation by the Department of Labor. The Court refused to accept the employer’s calculation because, if accepted, this theory could allow employers to withhold overtime compensation if employees are paid one and one-half times the minimum wage.

If you have been denied overtime wages, the experienced Philadelphia employment lawyers at the Law Office Of Sidkoff, Pincus & Green will fight to get you the compensation you deserve. To schedule a consultation, call us at 215-574-0600 or contact us online today. With offices conveniently located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Southeastern Pennsylvania and South Jersey.

  Category: Uncategorized
  Comments: Comments Off on Pa District Court Rules That Employer Who Paid Its Employees One-And-One-Half Times the Minimum Wage Rate Was Still Required to Pay Overtime Compensations
  Other posts by

Third Circuit Holds that Employee’s Anti-Vaccination Beliefs were not Religious

By ,

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed the opinion of the District Court that a medical center employee’s anti-vaccination beliefs were not religious in nature. The employee had been terminated for refusing to be vaccinated against the flu and claimed that his termination constituted religious discrimination. His case was dismissed by the District Court. The Court found that although his beliefs were sincere, they were not religious in nature and not protected by Title VII.  This determination was affirmed by the Third Circuit.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Under Title VII, it is unlawful to terminate an employee because of their religion as all adverse employment action based on a person’s religious affiliation is prohibited by the Act. Under the statute, religion encompasses belief, unless an employer can show that they are unable to reasonably accommodate their observance without undue hardship.

The legal standard, with respect to the employee’s personally held beliefs, is whether they addressed the fundamental questions having to do with deep and imponderable matters, and whether they are comprehensive in nature and accompanied by certain formal and external signs. When discussing his own beliefs, the employee in this case stated that one should not harm their own body, that he believed the flu vaccine did more harm than good, and that bowing to the medical center’s policy would violate his conscience as to what he believed was right and wrong. Because his beliefs did not meet the threshold set by the standard, the Court ultimately found that his beliefs were not religious. The Court noted that anti-vaccination beliefs could be part of a broader religious faith, in which case, refusal might be protected.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. Represent Victims of Religious Discrimination

If you suspect that you have suffered an adverse employment action because of your religious beliefs, the Philadelphia employment lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green P.C. may be able help. To discuss your case, call us today at 215-574-0600 or contact us online. Our legal team handles all types of employment related litigation.

Court Rules that Accommodations for Indefinite Leave are Not Reasonable

By ,

An Appellate Court in Connecticut recently ruled that a reasonable accommodation for medical leave does not require employers to wait indefinitely for an employee’s medical condition to resolve itself. In the case of Thomson v. Department of Social Services, the plaintiff informed her employer that she would be taking a leave of absence from her work, but did not provide her employer with a time frame for her return. She also did not respond to her employer’s subsequent attempts to reach out to her in order to determine when she planned to return.

According to the Court, this employee essentially asked her employer to hold her position open for her indefinitely while she attempted to recover. The Court, relying on federal laws, found that this was not a reasonable accommodation request. The plaintiff, according to the Court, could not establish a prima facie case of discrimination on these facts.

The employee informed her supervisor that she would be taking “over thirty days” leave depending on whether the lung condition resolved itself. And during a deposition, she confirmed that she did not know how long she was going to be out of work to recover from her health condition.

At the time she left her employment to take leave, the employee filled out a number of forms for her employer. The information she listed on these forms was incoherent and confusing. Her employer even reached out to her by certified mail for additional information, and did not receive a response. When the time came that she was required to submit further information and did not, her employer terminated her. The Court upheld the termination, because the accommodation that she requested was deemed unreasonable.

Philadelphia Employment Lawyers at Sidkoff, Pincus & Green Represent Clients in Employment Disputes

If you are in need of a Philadelphia employment lawyer, contact Sidkoff, Pincus & Green. To learn more about how our dedicated team of trial attorneys can help you, call 215-574-0600 or contact us online.