Justice Department Files a Lawsuit Alleging Employment Discrimination by Georgia Rug Manufacturer and Seller

/PRNewswire/ -- The Justice Department today filed a lawsuit against Garland Sales Inc., a rug manufacturer and seller located in Dalton, Ga., alleging it engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination by imposing unnecessary and discriminatory hurdles to employment for work authorized individuals.

According to the department's findings, Garland required all non-U.S. citizen applicants to present certain work authorization documents. The Immigration and National Act (INA) requires that employers not impose different or greater employment eligibility verification (I-9) standards on non-citizen authorized workers as compared to U.S. citizens. Garland imposed different and greater requirements on non-U.S. citizens as compared to applicants who were U.S. citizens.

Moreover, the department found that Garland retaliated against a limited English proficient naturalized U.S. citizen, when it rescinded a job offer. Specifically, Garland requested the individual produce a "Green Card" (Form I-551 Resident Alien Card), which the applicant did not have because he is a U.S. Citizen. When the applicant did not produce this document and voiced concern about being asked to produce it, Garland withdrew his offer of employment.

"The INA's anti-discrimination provision makes it illegal to impose different rules for establishing work authorization based on actual or perceived citizenship status," said Thomas E. Perez, the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights Division. "Our Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) is acting now to remedy this illegal pattern or practice of discrimination."

The lawsuit charging Garland was filed in the department's Executive Office for Immigration Review - Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO).

The Civil Rights Division's Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) is responsible for enforcing the anti-discrimination provisions of the INA, which protect U.S. citizens and certain work-authorized individuals from citizenship status discrimination. The INA also protects all work-authorized individuals from national origin discrimination, over-documentation in the employment eligibility verification process, and retaliation.

Earlier this month, OSC entered into an out-of-court settlement with Macy's department stores to settle allegations that a store in Orlando, Fla., committed document abuse and discriminated against a legal permanent resident by requesting more work authorization documents than are required to establish eligibility under the Form I-9. As part of the settlement, Macy's has agreed to train its human resources employees in its Orlando area stores about federal protections for workers against citizenship status and national origin discrimination, and properly conducting the employment verification process.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter:  @GAFrontPage

Phone Company Dials Wrong Number on Employees' Overtime

/PRNewswire/ -- AT&T, the nation's largest provider of phone and internet services, and its subsidiaries, Pacific Bell Telephone Co. ("PacBell") and BellSouth Telecommunications Co. ("BellSouth"), have been withholding as much as $1 billion in overtime wages from more than 5,000 of the company's First Level "Managers" throughout the country. That's the accusation at the heart of two class action lawsuits filed today in U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of California in San Francisco and the Northern District of Georgia in Atlanta by the law firm of Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP.

The two class actions seek unpaid overtime wages for First Levels who worked for PacBell in California, BellSouth's 9-state region in Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee, North Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, South Carolina and Kentucky, and nearly every other state in the union where the phone giant does business. The suits allege that AT&T violated the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and California state laws by carrying out a company-wide policy to wrongfully misclassify thousands of its Level One Managers as exempt from overtime wages.

The suits follow on the heels of a recent favorable class certification decision achieved by Sanford Wittels & Heisler for Level One Managers working for AT&T's Connecticut subsidiary, Southern New England Telephone Company (SNET). In a ruling issued in November, U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall dubbed SNET's opposition to class certification "disingenuous" and "unpersuasive." Under the Court's direction, Class Notice has been sent to all Connecticut First Level Managers, who according to Class Counsel could ultimately receive up to 50 million dollars or more in withheld overtime pay after trial.

"The Court's decision in Connecticut opens the network for thousands of other AT&T Level One Managers all over the country to finally get paid for the endless hours a year the Company expects them to work for free," said Steven L. Wittels, Lead Class Counsel.

AT&T, listed Number 8 on the Fortune 500, has revenues of over $100 billion a year and employs 294,600 workers worldwide. First Level "Managers" are ground troops in the multi-billion dollar operation, who perform primarily clerical duties and relay information between company management and its technicians in the field. AT&T and its operating subsidiaries require these employees to work upwards of sixty hours a week but claim that these workers do not deserve overtime pay.

"AT&T is in disconnect mode when it comes to its so-called managers," adds Lead Counsel Jeremy Heisler. "The company knows all too well that its 'Managers' have that title in name only, and lack the typical managerial responsibilities you associate with a manager," he says. "In fact, until the takeover by AT&T two years ago, BellSouth used to pay all its First Levels overtime. What changed? Nothing but the Company's desire to squeeze earned wages out of its employees' paychecks."

Joe Lewis Luque, a former AT&T Level One employee in Bakersfield, California and a named plaintiff in the San Francisco action, said: "They called me a manager, but that's the opposite of what I was. When I tried to fire a technician assigned to me who was high on drugs, my Manager told me 'Who the f--k do you think you are to fire someone?! You can't fire anyone. You don't have the authority.'" He adds that he worked ten to fourteen hours every day. "I was also on call 24-7 and often had to work all weekend, yet AT&T never paid me an extra dime."

The BellSouth Plaintiffs' complaint echoes their California brethren's experience. The complaint describes BellSouth's First Levels as "glorified clerks" who were expected to work excessive hours without compensation.

Representing the Plaintiffs in these actions are Steven L. Wittels, Jeremy Heisler, Andrew Melzer and Marc Litton in Sanford Wittels & Heisler's New York and San Francisco offices; David Sanford in the firm's Washington, D.C.; Michael Ram and Karl Olson of Ram & Olson, Of Counsel to the firm in San Francisco; Ed Buckley of Buckley & Klein, LLP in Atlanta, Georgia; and Edmond Clark in Madison, Connecticut.

The complaints against AT&T and its subsidiaries charge that the colossus telecommunications provider fails to pay its Level One employees overtime wages for work in excess of 40 hours a week and eight hours a day; fails to provide these workers with mandatory meal periods and rest breaks; and fails to keep accurate records of the hours these employees work. The suits allege that the Company deliberately mislabels its Level Ones as "management" in order to avoid its obligation to pay overtime to its workers.

The Plaintiffs' attorneys at Sanford Wittels & Heisler estimate the Company's liability at $1 billion. The class action suits demands that AT&T, PacBell, and BellSouth immediately stop their unlawful pay practices and pay Mr. Luque and all Level One "Managers" unpaid wages due to them plus all damages permitted by California and federal wage and hour laws.

"Because overtime laws help motivate companies to hire more workers to get the job done, they're the kind of economic stimulus that we can't overestimate in today's dire economic climate," states Plaintiffs' attorney Andrew Melzer.

Co-Counsel Edmond Clark adds that it's time for the phone Goliath to restore basic services to its workers. "For years the company used to pay its Connecticut Level Ones overtime, now it cut off its Florida workers' overtime. Paying your workers for all their time worked should be a basic operating plan of any company."

Class Counsel for the First Levels David Sanford has a message for the phone company's management: "Pay your workers. Overtime pay is a right, not a privilege. When it's 4 o'clock in the morning and your lower level workers are out there making sure your customers don't have a busy signal, you have to pay them for their sweat and labor. The law allows no excuses."

Sanford Wittels & Heisler is a renowned class action law firm with offices in New York, San Francisco, Washington, D.C. and New Jersey that specializes in employment discrimination, wage and hour, consumer and complex corporate class action litigation, and has obtained more than a hundred million dollars in recoveries for individuals represented in class action cases nationwide . The firm also represents individual clients in employment, employment discrimination, sexual harassment, whistleblower, public accommodations, commercial, medical malpractice, mass tort and personal injury matters. Individuals with knowledge of AT&T's wage practices are encouraged to contact Sanford Wittels & Heisler at: (646) 723-2947 or (202) 742-7448 or ATT-classaction@nydclaw.com; swittels@nydclaw.com; amelzer@nydclaw.com, or dsanford@nydclaw.com.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

GM Auto Dealerships Seek Special Committee From GM Bankruptcy Trustee

/PRNewswire/ -- On behalf of terminated and soon-to-be-terminated GM auto dealerships, former U.S. Attorney G. Douglas Jones dispatched a letter yesterday to General Motors bankruptcy trustee Diana G. Adams asking that a special committee be established to protect the interests of terminated GM auto dealerships who operate as separate operating entities and have provided hundreds of millions in tax revenues to state and local governments.

"The best way to at least create a seat at the table for the affected dealers and the claims they represent in the bankruptcy is the appointment of a Terminated Dealers Committee," wrote Jones. "The significant interest these dealers have in the orderly bankruptcy process and the interplay of the dealers' rights under both bankruptcy law and applicable state laws is vital. The appointment of such a committee is crucial in these opening days as important decisions concerning the future of General Motors are being reached."

GM announced last month that they intended to slash auto dealerships by 42 percent from 2008 to 2010 levels. Dealerships will be reduced by 2,641 locations, from 6,246 to 3,605.

The proposal came in reaction to auto dealerships being left out of the restructuring. "Unlike many of the major affected players, including the United States government, United Auto Workers, major suppliers, bond holders and multi-million dollar pension funds, these small town dealerships risk having no voice in the General Motors bankruptcy," Jones wrote.

Jones added, "It is important to note that these dealerships are wholly-owned and separate operating entities apart from General Motors. In fact, many of these dealerships are operating companies that have successfully been in existence and turning a profit for years. For example, our client, Abercrombie Chevrolet has been in existence for over 52 years and has been a family owned General Motors dealership operating in Hartselle, Alabama. The Abercrombie family, along with owners and families throughout this country, are being severely impacted by the General Motors bankruptcy."

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use

Lawsuit Filed in Nationwide Outbreak of Salmonella in Peanut Butter

(BUSINESS WIRE)--A lawsuit stemming from the national outbreak of Salmonella Typhimurium in peanut butter was filed yesterday against the Peanut Corporation of America (PCA) in the US District Court, Middle District of Georgia. The complaint was filed on behalf of Vermont residents Gabrielle and Daryl Meunier, whose son was sickened in the outbreak. The minor and his parents are represented by Seattle lawyer William Marler and foodborne illness law firm Marler Clark, and by Patrick Flynn of Flynn, Peeler & Phillips of Albany, GA.

The outbreak, which began in September, has sickened more that 475 people, hospitalized over 90, and contributed to six deaths. The illnesses were first linked to peanut butter on January 9, and later traced to a PCA processing plant in Blakely, GA. Many companies who purchased peanut butter or peanut paste from the plant have begun recalling products. One of the first was Kellogg’s, who recalled Keebler brand peanut butter cracker sandwiches, but it was too late for the Meunier family, whose son consumed the crackers and fell ill on November 25.

The 7-year-old’s symptoms were fever, vomiting, and frequent bouts of diarrhea, which turned bloody. When he did not improve, his family took him to the emergency room, where he was admitted to the hospital. He remained hospitalized until December 4. During that time, he tested positive for what would later be revealed as the outbreak strain of Salmonella Typhimurium. He is still recovering from his illness, experiencing recurring diarrhea, painful stomach cramps, and body aches and pains.

“Today (January 20) is a tremendous day in America,” said Marler. “We are inaugurating a President who campaigned on a platform of change, hope, and justice. I sincerely hope that Mr. Obama will be able to effect change in our food safety agencies and policies. In the meantime, hundreds of Americans are ill, and six families are mourning. All of those families have medical bills, some have lost time at work, and we all know what a strain that is. Something has to be done about it.”

Marler, who called for more action from the FDA earlier in the outbreak, also represented many of the compensated victims of the ConAgra peanut butter outbreak of 2007.

“We learned a lot in the last peanut butter outbreak, and it’s sad that we have to put that knowledge to use,” continued Marler. “But what we know is that we have to make sure all possibly contaminated product is promptly recalled, and that the responsible companies step up to pay the medical bills of the victims as well as the cost of government investigations. In addition, the public needs to know what safety precautions the Peanut Corporation of America was taking, especially after the 2007 outbreak. Finally, they need to show the public what will be done to prevent the next outbreak.”

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page