Employment Lawyer Blog

If you or a close family member has contemplated "blowing the whistle" on your company or organization, you may simultaneously experience a number of conflicting emotions:

Fear

You might worry about your safety, your family's safety, your employability, the company's reputation, your ability to provide for your family, and more.

Excitement

Whistleblowers often wait months, if not years, to "do something" about abuses, environmental malfeasance, corporate rule breaking, etc. When they finally make the decision to call management out on their misdeeds, that decision can feel tremendously empowering. It takes great courage to rise up and speak your mind, especially if you face a "David vs. Goliath" situation.

Uncertainty/confusion

What are your rights as a whistleblower? What compensation can you expect if, for instance, your case is a Qui Tam case? What are the right steps and processes for you to take to protect your legal rights, protect your job (if possible), and protect your reputation? Whom can you trust to guide you to proper resolution and answer your questions along the way.

Anger/disappointment

As you initiate the whistleblowing process, you may experience waves of anger, disappointment, resentment, and sadness as you discover that once close friends and associates either turn their back on you, fail to offer effective support, or even side with "the enemy."

Renewed hope

On the flip side, you might be surprised by the gracious and generous behaviors, gestures, and attitudes of people in your company - and elsewhere - who look after you, protect your reputation, and even join you in your fight for justice.

A Whistleblower Case May be Different Than What You're Picturing In Your Mind

Whistleblowers, as typically depicted in movies and television, are often physically threatened. Maybe an angry boss or co-conspirator throws a rock through the window or commits nefarious and highly personal attacks. But these kinds of behaviors are far rarer than you might think.

On the flip side, you might not be prepared for the extent of the "shunning" you could experience as a whistleblower. Friends at work might feel intense social pressure to distance themselves from you and even to side with management against you. The social/emotional consequences of being shunned can be hard to take, even if you prepare in advance.

Moreover, studies by groups like the Ethics Resource Center suggest that retaliation against whistleblowers may be increasing. In 2007, the ERC found that whistleblowers were retaliated against 12% of the time; in 2011, whistleblowers were retaliated against 22% of the time.

For help preparing yourself and your family for a whistleblower case, or to respond effectively to retaliation, discrimination, or harassment, connect with the team here at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum. Call the firm at 866-348-7394, or learn more about our services at www.jhllp.com.

Last October, an anonymous actress launched an age discrimination lawsuit against Amazon and its subsidiary, the Internet Movie Database (IMDB). For months, Tinsel Town has been abuzz with speculation about who the actress might be. The anonymous woman claimed that Amazon extracted her personal information from a credit card and used it to date her as a "40-year-old woman" on the IMDB service. She claimed that this information subsequently cost her work. In the words of the filing, it led to a "substantial decrease in acting credits, employment opportunities and earnings."

This Hollywood age discrimination suit struck a chord, even with many who considered the idea of suing Amazon to be excessive. After all, Screen Actors Guild statistics suggest that women over the age of 40 account for just 12% of film and TV roles. Meanwhile, in the general US population, women over 40 make up nearly a quarter of the population.

In December, a Seattle judge dismissed the woman's lawsuit on the grounds that she could not pursue the complaint anonymously. This led to the big revelation: her name. Drumroll please. It is...

Huong Hoang of Texas.

Hadn't her of heard? You're not alone. Turns out, the actress has appeared only so far in small budget films and minor TV roles. Her credits include Gingerdead Man 3: Saturday Night Cleaver and Hoodrats 2: Hoodrat Warriors. (Huong's bio suggests that she can play character ages 26 to 33.)

Will the revelation lead to legal justice for the actress? Will all of the publicity surrounding her case lead to her being hired for a larger television or film project? Stranger things have happened.

On a more serious note, age discrimination in Hollywood and beyond is a silent but pernicious problem. Often, victims feel embarrassed, disempowered, and unclear about their rights. So they don't end up investigating in their legal options. Instead, they suffer poor treatment - even hiring or firing injustices - in silence. If you or someone you care about has been a victim of age discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation, or other workplace mistreatment, the team here at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can help you. Connect with the office today at 866-348-7394 or www.jhllp.com.

The popular Atlanta-based restaurant chain Huddle House has come under the gun for alleged wage and hour violations. According to a U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division investigation, Huddle House also allegedly violated labor laws.

A story in Nation's Restaurant News catalogued the bad news: some "employees' income did not meet the minimum wage because they were required to share their tips with different employees, or because the restaurants took deduction for breakage losses, damages and check cashing fees. In addition, some non-tipped employees, such as cooks, were paid less than minimum wage."

On top of that, many tipped employees were not correctly paid for overtime, and some employees who were non-exempt didn't receive any overtime at all. In one case, a 15-year-old employee at Huddle House worked more hours than the law allows; that Huddle House franchise faces a child labor violation charge.

Huddle House is not the only Southern restaurant or franchise to come under the gun lately. The Department of Labor just finished conducting a multi-year investigation of Georgia restaurants; and the DOL uncovered significant non-compliance with federal regulations, such as wage and hour rules.

Sound familiar?

If you've been paying attention to the wage-and-hour news out of New York City, you would almost certainly recognize the name Maimon Kirschenbaum, a lead attorney here at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum. Attorney Kirschenbaum has earned widespread notoriety for his relentless battle against abusive practices at New York City restaurants. He has taken on the biggest celebrity chefs and most powerful restaurants in the city, in an ongoing quest to ensure that workers, such as cooks, servers, bartenders, and managers, are paid appropriately, treated fairly, and protected from future abuse.

If you are a restaurant worker and you suspect you and your co-workers have been treated unfairly, discriminated against, retaliated against, or harassed, the powerful and proven team here at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can help. Find out more about our philosophy and how we can help at www.jhllp.com, or call us now at 866-348-7394.

Lanisha Cole has filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the producers of the popular game show, The Price Is Right. Cole, one of the longest tenured models in The Price Is Right's history, has accused the producers of humiliating her, berating her, sexually harassing her, and ultimately wrongfully terminating her, according to a 20 page civil complaint that her lawyers filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

Cole started working on the game show back in 2003 (during the Bob Barker era). She enjoyed a normal, fun environment at work for more than six years. However, in late 2009, she allegedly began having difficulties with two of the show's producers, Adam Sandler and Michael Richards (neither man is related to the comedians of the same names). Richards apparently started having a sexual relationship with a different model and began offering her preferential treatment. Richards enacted policies "which never before existed" to curtail Cole's modeling work.

In a separate incident, the following September, the other producer, Sandler, allegedly burst into Cole's dressing room despite a "Knock Before Entering" sign and castigated her failing to wear microphone... "Sandler deliberately humiliated Ms. Cole in front of her peers. [She was wearing nothing but] a very sheer thong bikini underwear bottom... [and] all the women in the dressing room, included Ms. Cole, were frozen in shock until Sandler finished his tirade and stormed out of the women's dressing room."

Ms. Cole complained to higher-ups about what was happening to her. Shortly thereafter, she was terminated - allegedly, the producers accused of her "holding the show hostage" because of her sexual harassment complaints.

This story illustrates three relevant lessons:

Lesson #1: Sexual harassment can happen in any workplace.

Just because you work on a game show - ostensibly a fun, frivolous environment - does not inoculate you from potential mistreatment, mean bosses, and unfair working conditions.

Lesson #2: Bad behavior can start months or even years after you get hired.

In this case, Ms. Cole allegedly spent six plus very good years working on the show with no problems whatsoever. Her situation degraded only after one of the producers began to have an affair with her co-worker. So there aren't always warning signs.

Lesson #3: Harassment and abuse can "accrete" and get worse over time.

Certainly, you can find incidences where a single catastrophically unwise act (a boss trying to grope an underling on a company retreat, for instance) has merited legal action. But many cases are similar to Ms. Cole's case - abuse, harassment, discrimination, and other bad treatment occuring in small, chronic, poisonous doses -- often escalating -- before the victim takes action.

For help with your case, connect with an experienced New York sexual harassment, discrimination, wage and hour violation law firm. Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can help you understand how to protect yourself, get abusers to stop, and possibly even seek significant compensation. Call us now at 866-348-7394 or connect with us at www.jhllp.com.

The Producer of Superman, Jon Peters, lost a significant sexual harassment lawsuit last week. A jury ordered the hairdresser-cum-studio executive to pay $3 million to his former assistant, Shelly Morita, who waged a five-year legal battle to bring her former boss to justice. Morita will get $822,000 in lost wages on top of $2.5 million in punitive damages.
According to an August 27 article at msnbc.com, "[the] 44-year-old single mother sued Peters and his company, J.P. Organization Inc., in December 2006, alleging he fondled her at his Malibu home and climbed into bed with her in an Australian hotel during the 2005 filming of "Superman Returns." She claimed that she couldn't find work in Hollywood after suing Peters because of his pull in the industry."

A Hollywood Reporter article reported that: "Peters [also allegedly] withheld a $25,000 Christmas bonus until [Morita] signed a confidentiality agreement."

The former hairdresser vowed to appeal the decision. But some pundits and entertainment watchers are considering the jury verdict to be a kind of "shot across the bow" - warning Hollywood executives, producers, agents, and other big wigs that the "swimming with the sharks" treatment will not, and should not, be tolerated.

Swimming with Sharks, starring Kevin Spacey, is about a tyrannical producer who tormented his young wannabe-Hollywood-player assistant until the assistant snapped, kidnapped Spacey and returned the torment, literally. It's no secret among Hollywood insiders that Hollywood players often mistreat, abuse, harass, and otherwise degrade their assistants. It's an open secret, actually. But, the question is: What can be done to change the culture in Hollywood so that these big wigs treat assistants and other supporting staffers with respect - or at least end the most flagrant abuses?

Is it a matter of simply going after the worst offenders - like Mr. Peters - or is it a matter of more systematically changing the culture in Hollywood to hammer home the point that bad treatment of employees will simply not be tolerated? Or maybe it is both - go after every violation until the norm changes.

It is indeed possible for whole industries to be corrupt. The New York City restaurant industry, for instance, for years engaged in bad practices that allowed "a cultural norm" to develop that encouraged restaurateurs to violate wage and hour laws. Thanks to persistent legal action against these restaurateurs - waged in part by Joseph and Herzfeld's own attorney Maimon Kirschenbaum - we may now soon see changes to the culture. But it's no doubt going to be a long and vigorous battle.

If you or someone you care about has recently been mistreated, harassed, or retaliated against, the team at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can help you. Connect with us today at 866-348-7394, or explore more about our firm at www.jhllp.com.

In a recent post on how workers can deal with sexual harassment, we discussed how people typically react to insensitive, inappropriate, and sometimes outright malevolent workplace comments. We also talked about a school of thought known as nonviolent communication, which emphasizes constructive problem-solving by getting the parties involved to focus on fundamental universal human feelings and needs at the core of conflicts.

In this follow-up post, we will apply Dr. Marshall Rosenberg's conflict resolution theories to a typical workplace harassment problem.

Say your boss makes a comment to the effect of "Those jeans looks so hot on you, I just want to squeeze you all over," and that makes you feel disgusted. According to Rosenberg, you can use two paths here. First, you can express your own feelings and needs by using a four-part system.

Step 1: Observation (done without judgment - just stating the facts): "When you just said to me 'You look hot in my jeans, I want to squeeze them'..."

Step 2: State your feelings, taking responsibility for them: "I felt humiliated and angry..."

Step 3: Discuss your need that was or was not met: "Because my need for respect and professionalism at work was not met..."

Step 4: Make a concrete request: "Will you avoid making remarks like that in the future?"

Notice that, in this approach, you take complete responsibility for your feelings and needs. (No one can "make you feel" anything, according to Marshall Rosenberg's paradigm.)

The second approach involves focusing attentively on the other person's feelings and needs. Often, when you empathize with another person, that person will then open up and listen to your needs and feelings. The process is the same.

Step 1: Begin with an observation: "When you said 'you look sexy in your jeans'..."

Step 2: Guess about the other person's feelings (you can never really know, so you must guess): "Were you feeling aggressive..."

Step 3: Guess at his needs: "Because you wanted to test boundaries?"

Step 4: Make a definitive, actionable request: "Please refrain from making similar comments to me in the future."

Again, when you go this route, you avoid judging, condemning, or evaluating the other person. You are focusing on feelings and needs. You open the door to dialogue instead of immediately putting the other person on the defensive. Focusing on the offender's needs may not diffuse the situation, in which case, you might need to go to a higher authority to get the behavior to stop. But you might be able -- by practicing empathy in this way -- to get the offender to open up to your request (i.e. to stop doing the offensive behavior and/or apologize.)

This is only the tip of the iceberg of the nonviolent communication methodology, but it might be a useful paradigm to explore, particularly if you have chronic workplace problems. You can learn more about nonviolent communication at the official NVC website. If you need help understanding your rights and legal resources, connect with the team at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum at 866-348-7394, or explore additional resources at www.jhllp.com.

If you or someone you love has recently encountered a workplace violation - like racial discrimination or sexual harassment - you may be bombarded with advice how to rectify the situation and, possibly, hold the wrongdoer accountable. Whether a boss said something lascivious about your workplace attire, or a co-worker forwarded you something ghastly and inappropriate in an email, you want tools and ways of processing this unwanted event that empower you and protect your rights.

One very interesting method for dealing is a process called Nonviolent Communication. Dr. Marshall Rosenberg, a widely respected psychologist and peace negotiator, who has helped warring Rwandan tribes and Palestinians and Israelis negotiate with one another, developed this model of communication to help people resolve conflicts. Rosenberg claims his methodology helps people in conflict focus on their feelings and needs instead of on guilt, shame, and recrimination. In two blog posts, we will discuss a little bit about how the nonviolent communication approach might be deployed to help victims of harassment.

Let's consider a hypothetical situation in which a vice president at a telecommunications company encounters his secretary in the break room and makes comment, such as, "Wow, you look smokin' in that outfit." What might you do? Here are some typical reactions:

• "Give as well as you get" - either "harass" your boss back, insult him, or act in some kind of aggressive way;
• Say nothing but take your complaint to a higher authority, such as HR, to stop the behavior and, possibly, inflict penalties;
• Say nothing and "take it" and hope it goes away;

These solutions may work to make your workplace more comfortable; the sexual harassment may stop. But they all have potential drawbacks. For instance, if you "give as you get," you may only encourage the bad behavior. Alternatively, if you go to a higher authority to solve the problem, you could successfully end the annoying behavior, but you might set back your relationship with your boss. Simply absorbing it could make you stressed and may cause you to "explode" at some later time. Not reacting at all might also be construed as complicit acceptance of the unwanted behavior.

Nonviolent communication suggests two alternative ways to deal with the problem:

1. One involves expressing your own feelings and needs;
2. The other involves listening and empathizing with the boss's feelings and needs.

These two strategies can be deployed simultaneously, and you can shift from one to the other. But you might be surprised at how much more effective this nonviolent communication approach can be not just in terms of ending the harassment, but also in terms of "saving face" for everyone, maintaining a positive, constructive workplace, and even helping you and your boss both grow from the experience in dynamic ways.

In our next post on this topic, we will delve into nonviolent communication tactics to solve situations differently. We'll also give you more resources to explore this alternative philosophy.

If you need immediate assistance with an issue like sexual harassment, racial discrimination, gender discrimination, or any other workplace conflict, connect with the attorneys at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum at 866-348-7394, or learn more about the team at www.jhllp.com.

According to the New York Advocate, 23-year-old Priscilla Agosto has sued People's Choice Realty in Brooklyn for subjecting her to sexual harassment, racial discrimination, and even death threats. Agosto worked for the real estate office for 14 months, during which time she allegedly encountered truly sickening types of abuse. Mickey Berlianshik, a co-owner of a company, allegedly offered to pay her $60 for oral sex "because all Puerto Rican girls are good at it." Richard Berlianshik, another co-owner, supposedly groped her and "and exposed himself and urinated in front of her as she was cleaning a bathroom in the office. He would also show her photos of naked women, asking her to kiss the photographs."

A third man at the company offered to pay Agosto $500 to watch him have sex with his girlfriend. Another employee scared her with a death threat, allegedly, saying that "He would get rid of anyone threatening the company, adding that he didn't have a problem killing anyone."

Not every case of New York City sexual harassment is as replete with graphic and scary allegations. But you might be surprised by how many heartrending stories are out there involving innocent young workers being subjected to horrific mistreatment, including discrimination, harassment, and wage and hour violations.

One question that readers might have is: if Agosto was so horribly mistreated, why didn't she leave the firm earlier or seek help earlier?

This is a natural question to ask.

If human beings operated by a strictly rational calculus, Agosto's behavior (staying at an office where she was being so horribly mistreated) wouldn't make sense. But human beings are naturally socially conservative, in the sense that they try to avoid "making waves." We seek to fit in whenever possible.

Victims also can grow inured to harassment and abuse. Had Agosto, on her first day of work, been groped or solicited for sex, chances are she would have run away screaming. But after she acclimated to the office, maybe it was more difficult for her to get help and escape the situation.

Fortunately, good resources abound, and you don't have to fight this battle on your own. The compassionate, aggressive, very experienced team at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum will help you and provide a free and confidential consultation. Explore more firm resources at www.jhllp.com, or call us any time at 866-348-7394 to schedule a time to speak with us.

Fernando Flores, a former bodyguard for Britney Spears, is suing the 29-year old pop princess for sexual harassment.

The former police officer wants $10 million in damages. He claims that, during his half a year stint as one of Spear's bodyguards, the singer made "repeated, unwanted sexual advances." Flores' lawsuit also alleges that Spears spent a lot of time under the influence of drugs, like Narcon, Ritalin, and other methamphetamines.

One blurb from the lawsuit is particularly telling: "Spears was generally personally unkempt... [she] had obnoxious personal habits, such as chain smoking cigarettes, which made her smell continuously of stale tobacco. She broke wind or picked her nose... unapologetically before [Flores] and others, and she was constantly and gratuitously loud and profane in her speech."

According to TMZ.com, "Fernando Flores claims Britney made repeated unwanted sexual advances towards him by exposing herself in front of him in her home."

Flores described a scene in which Spears - who was wearing a skimpy white lace outfit - intentionally dropped her cigarette lighter, bent over to pick it up, and "thereby exposed her uncovered genitals to (Flores) causing him shock and disgust."

Another time, naked Britney summoned the bodyguard to her room to fetch her some bottles of 7UP. The third time she exposed herself, Britney allegedly taunted Flores, saying: "You know you liked it." Lastly, the suit also claimed that "in addition to exposing herself...Spears engaged in numerous sex acts in front of (Flores)."

The bodyguard finally quit his position after the pop princess allegedly exposed herself to him.

Unsurprisingly, Spears's attorneys have been quick to denounce Flores' allegations as totally untrue. But this has not stopped the blogosphere from going wild. Radar Online, for instance, seemed to revel in the details of Ms. Spears's alleged hygiene problems, and quoted the lawsuit extensively, including this blurb: "she did not bathe for days on end, did not use deodorant, did not brush her teeth, did not fix her hair, did not wear shoes or socks."

So did Spears "parade naked in front of [Flores] and often beckon him into her bedroom for sex"? Or didn't she?

Spears's history of odd behavior - remember a few years ago when she shaved her head seemingly for no reason? - no doubt prompted many readers to buy into some or all of Flores' allegations.

This is an important lesson: past perceptions can radically shape how we view future allegations. In this case, Flores' allegations seem to "rhyme" with Spears's tabloid worthy past behavior.

If you've experienced sexual harassment, racial discrimination, retaliation, or other some other form of workplace mistreatment, you might want to note any relevant historical behavior. If a supervisor (or other person) who mistreated you has a history of breaking the law, or at least making inept, stupid, or even hostile behavioral choices, this can help you.

For instance, say you served as an executive assistant for six months, and your boss has been sexually harassing you. If other past assistants can support the thrust of your argument -- by testifying that they, too, experienced harassment or at least saw signs that indicated that the boss was more than capable of violating workplace conduct rules -- then you may enjoy extra leverage to get compensation and hold the wrongdoer to account.

To approach your case in a systematic, strategic way, we invite you to connect with the powerful, experienced team at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum at 866-348-7394 or www.jhllp.com.

Victims of workplace sexual harassment, gender discrimination, wage and hour violations, and other atrocious and illegal treatment often wait a shockingly long time to take action to stop the bad behavior, seek justice, and move on. Why is this?

Are victims psychologically weak, scared, or intimidated? Are their cases less than rock solid? Are they seeing mistreatment where there really isn't any?

In many cases, the problem can be summed up nicely with the famous "boiling frog" metaphor. This is a metaphor that Al Gore made famous in his "Inconvenient Truth" documentary. Scientists and pundits evoke it to illustrate how it is possible for someone to drift into desperate straits without realizing it... until it's too late to do anything about it.

Boiling Frog Syndrome: If you toss a frog into a pot of boiling, the frog will immediately and alertly hop out of the water to safety, given the chance. But if you put that same frog into a pot of colder water and slowly heat the water until it comes to a rolling boil, the frog will just sit there and slowly allow itself to be boiled to death.

The same principle might be at work with workplace sexual harassment and other kinds of mistreatment. If, on the first day of your job, your boss or co-workers made outlandish sexual comments to you, forwarded you lewd pictures, or propositioned you, chances are that you would leave and never come back... and potentially alert the authorities. This would be a logical and rational response.

However: imagine you take a job at an office - maybe somewhere in Midtown Manhattan, for instance. You work at that job for several months and begin to enjoy it and develop relationships. Then, one day, your boss makes a veiled sexual proposition, which you choose to ignore. Slowly, but surely, the innuendo escalates. Pretty soon, you are dealing with a full blown case of sexual harassment - including, perhaps, lewd propositions, surreptitious e-mails, unwanted touching, etc. But now -- much like the frog placed in the cold water slowly heated to a boil -- you don't react "rationally" and instead allow the behavior to continue. You are now so used to your surroundings -- and you've become inured to the incremental increase in the sexual harassment -- that you know longer see it as weird but rather as something that's a normal part of the tapestry of your office life, or at least something you should or could tolerate.

Fortunately, there are resources that can help you out of the metaphorical boiling pot. If you or someone you know and care about has been experiencing workplace mistreatment of any kind, connect immediately with the law firm of Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum at www.jhllp.com, or dial our offices for a free and private consultation at 866-348-7394.

Nine cocktail waitresses have banded together to sue Atlantic City's Resorts Casino Hotel for age discrimination and gender discrimination. According to the Daily Mail (a UK paper), "Atlantic City waitresses claim they were made to strip in front of their co-workers and told to squeeze into flapper outfits that were too small for them. Their photographs were then sent to a modeling agency that decided who should stay and who should be axed."

The hotel, for its part, maintains that it evaluated each waitress fairly and maintained that the flapper costumes were a key part of its rebranding to capitalize on the revival of the "Roaring 20s" style spurred by the popular HBO TV series, Boardwalk Empire. Terry Bruno, a former waitress at Resorts, said "we had to go up into this poorly lit, dingy room with uniforms strewn all the floor and we had to try and find something to fit us." Another waitress, 53-year-old Katharyn Felicia, insisted that the resort's rebranding was "very degrading to women... we had no idea that the photo shoot was fighting for our jobs." She also told the Daily Mail: "I was forced to get undressed in front of six co-workers, one of them being my manager... I had no top on because you can't wear a bra with the uniform. I had stockings on, but that's it. It was the most embarrassing thing I've ever had to do."

The gender discrimination allegations touched off a rowdy and at times unpleasant debate on the blogosphere about the rights and responsibilities of cocktail waitresses. Critics of the lawsuit argue that the job of "cocktail waitress" is by nature intended for younger women. The resort deserves the chance to make money; if the law required the hotel to employ septuagenarian and octogenarian (to go to the extreme) cocktail waitresses, then the business would lose money. Not so fast, say advocates of workers. Sure, businesses like casinos should be entitled to screen employees legally and pick the best people suited for the job. But the screening process cannot be arbitrary. It cannot violate age discrimination and gender discrimination laws.

Gloria Allred, an attorney representing the women, put it this way: "Mr. Gomez [the resort boss] may have sought to recreate the 1920s with the flapper uniforms and G-men. But we are here to remind him that, although there were no laws prohibiting employers from discriminating against women on account of their sex and age at that time, there are laws that prohibit such discriminatory conduct now."

The lawsuit fascinates the public because it touches on multiple "hot button" issues, including:

• The rights of the women in the workforce;
• The fears and anxieties of baby boomers as they age out of certain jobs and face uncertain retirement circumstances;
• The fears of many Americans languishing in the stagnant economy;
• The new obsession many Americans have with the 1920s, thanks to Boardwalk Empire;
• Americans' ongoing fascination with the somewhat seedy world of casinos and cocktail bars.

If you or someone you care about has been retaliated against or has experienced unfair treatment at work, wage and hour violations, or discrimination of any kind, the team at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can help you understand and protect your rights and get abusive behavior to stop. Learn more about your rights at www.jhllp.com, or call us toll free at 866-348-7394.

Yale University, perhaps the Ivy League's most respected school, is still reeling from a public relations nightmare stemming from charges of sexual harassment and intimidation on campus. Earlier in the spring, the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights investigated complaints launched by 16 current and former students that Yale had violated Title IX of the United States gender equality laws. Last week, Yale took a decisive step towards stamping out sexual harassment, intimidation, and hostility on campus by punishing a campus fraternity, Delta Kappa Epsilon (a.k.a DKE), for intimidating and threatening women.

Last October, the DKEs were recorded marching around campus chanting "No means yes! Yes means anal!" Video of the sexist, misogynist chant got posted on YouTube and went viral. In light of this release, Yale University officials felt compelled to take action to punish the fraternity. A May 17th story from an article in Reuters detailed the University's actions:

• DKE may not recruit or engage on fraternity activities on Yale's campus for five years.
• DKE may not use Yale's name or communicate with Yale students.
• Yale University has asked the national organization of Delta Kappa Epsilon to suspend Yale's chapter for five years.
• The Dean of the Yale College, Mary Miller, released a statement explaining the University's draconian actions: "It is my hope that this will not only shed some light on the matter of public concern but also provide notice of the outcomes to all those who may have been affected by sexual harassment and, accordingly, educate our community."

Did Yale go too far in punishing DKE? Did the university not go far enough?

Can sexual harassment - and discrimination in general - ever be "stamped out" in our nation's universities and colleges? And how should schools balance the desire to cultivate freedom of expression and the need to punish people for abusing that freedom to hurt others?

These are not easy questions to answer.

Bastions of learning, like Yale, were designed not only to educate young people and instill ideals of scholarship but also to challenge them to communicate in new ways and to engage in critical, dynamic thinking. Clearly, even our nation's most elite universities struggle with how to temper the desire to stimulate with the mandate to protect students and others from needless harassment, discrimination, and retaliation.

What we learn at college can shape the way we think, behave and interact with others for a lifetime. If we learn that loud, bullying, misogynistic behaviors on campus will go unpunished and perhaps even rewarded by our peers, we will be more likely to carry these behaviors with us after we graduate and enter the professional sphere. Moreover, once we learn that the "power over other" mentality gets results, we will have difficultly unlearning it, even after we intellectually come to appreciate how it can damage others and ourselves.

Fortunately, victims of mistreatment at work can leverage a variety of resources to end bad practices and make the office safe and supportive.

If you or someone you care about has experienced mistreatment at work, the law firm of Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester and Kirschenbaum can give you a free and totally confidential case evaluation. Learn more at www.jhllp.com or call 866-348-7394.

Victims of workplace sexual harassment often experience psychological "collateral damage." In other words, not only do victims suffer consequences in the real world (loss of a job, demotion, unfair payment terms, etc.), but they also experience mental scarring that leads to insidious, longer-term damage to self esteem.

If someone at your work propositions you for sexual favors or makes derogatory comments about your clothing, you may consciously reject the criticism/harassment. But your subconscious mind might still pick up -- and even begin to believe -- the judgments. For instance, say your superior one day makes a comment like: "you look enormous in that skirt. Are you pregnant?" Your conscious reaction might be to laugh off the insult or even to insult him back. But once the exchange ends, the slow poison of that cutting remark can really start to do its work. Hours (or days or weeks) later, long after you've forgotten that the exchange even happened; you may find yourself steering clear of that pretty dress. You may even reassess your body image and begin to think that you really are "fat and unattractive."

Believe it or not, the relationship between the insult and its long term psychological "damage" may be even more indirect. For instance, weeks after the harassment, you may develop a vague sense of anxiety about a work project. Subconscious and unconscious connections can remain entrenched, kind of like psychological scar tissue.

So what can you do to correct this latent damage once it's been done?

This question is obviously far too big for a single blog post to answer. But consider that different individuals may have different psychological "immune systems." Scientists are only barely beginning to understand how they function. For some people, insults may not create much, if any, longer-term damage because their "immune systems" function at a high level. For others, the damage can be totally out of proportion to the initial insult. So a tactic to salve the unconscious trauma might work for you, but it might not work for your coworker. Or -- even more subtly -- what works for you in one situation might not work for you in another situation.

All that said, victims can deploy a surprising variety of tactics and strategies to overcome the ravages of being mistreated. Counseling, meditation, leaving the "offending environment," and even developing alternative sources of self-esteem (e.g. getting really good at playing darts or aerobics, hanging out with people who value and compliment you, etc.) might be useful measures to deploy.

Another hugely important tactic is to gain successful closure to the offending incident by resolving and even getting compensated for mistreatment. The law firm of Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum provides a fully confidential and complete free case evaluation. If you experienced something hurtful and possibly illegal at the workplace - harassment, discrimination, wage and hour violations, or the like - connect with their team at 866-348-7394 or www.jhllp.com.

31-year old Janet Kim has filed a complaint through the New York State of Human Rights against "Hell's Kitchen" and "Kitchen Nightmare" celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay -- as well as Ramsay's restaurant in the London NYC Hotel. The single mom, who works as a commis chef, alleges that her male colleagues sexually harassed her and mistreated her in a variety of ways.

Here are some of the "incendiary" allegations against the male chefs:

• According to the Daily Mail Reporter, workers referred to her derogatorily as "China" - hinting at racial and ethnic discrimination there.
• Chefs called her a whore and propositioned her for oral sex.
• Ms. Kim also alleges she was retaliated against by the kitchen staff members, who forced her to make tiny hors d'oeuvres in what her male colleagues called the "c**t corner."
• In the wake of Ms. Kim's accusations, many members of the staff -- who were furious at her -- walked out of the restaurant to protest her return.

Although Ramsay no longer owns the 2 star Michelin restaurant - he sold it back to its original owners - the fine dining establishment bears his name, and it gets a significant amount of business because of its association with his celebrity. The allegations of sexual harassment, racial harassment, and retaliation are particularly ironic, since one of Chef Ramsay's most famous TV shows - Kitchen Nightmares - focused on rehabilitating restaurants in trouble.

According to the Daily Mail Reporter, "Ms. Kim felt the British Chef's fiery television persona had rubbed off in her male colleagues, creating a 'toxic environment'." Her legal representative suggested that "she feels he is a celebrity who films the shows there [at the London]... where this type of environment [fiery and testosterone driven] is permitted and accepted."

So far, both Gordon Ramsay's spokespeople and LXR Luxury Resorts (the company which now owns the London NYC) have kept mum about the allegations.

Chef Ramsay is not the only celebrity restaurateur who's recently been targeted with charges like wage and hour violations, sexual harassment, and retaliation. Far from it. But, just because you're a celebrity who owns a business does not give you the right to mistreat your employees. Unfortunately, a kind of "culture of abuse" pervades many restaurants; especially, apparently, here in New York City.

Fortunately, victims have rights, and they have a lot of law on their side. If you or someone you care about has been subject to any kind of mistreatment at your restaurant or other work place, the powerful and resourceful team at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can provide a free and confidential consultation. Learn more about the firm at www.jhllp.com, or dial 866-348-7394 to get a confidential consultation now.

According to an April 25th article in the Hartford Courant, last year, employees filed nearly 100,000 complaints of workplace discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) - "an all-time high."

More than 33,000 complaints were specifically for retaliation, which has now surpassed "racial discrimination" as the number one EEOC complaint. The EEOC also received high numbers of racial discrimination, gender discrimination, disability and national origin, and religious discrimination complaints last year.

A spokesperson for Connecticut's Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO), Jim O'Neill, blamed the spike on the recession: "The economy is bad and people are desperate not to lose their jobs, so they are filing complaints they would not necessarily have made in the past."

The Courant, however, also quotes an EEOC spokesperson, James Ryan, who cautioned analysts not to over-interpret the spike: "The fiscal year charge data can tell us a lot, but it does not tell us why there was an increase in a given charge or about the cause for the filing of particular charges."

The Courant's analyst speculates that the rise in retaliation filings could be attributable to "shifting legal strategies by plaintiffs' lawyers."

The swelling number of complaints has some policymakers alarmed. Will all this legal action help employees and make the system fairer? Or will it simply glut the court systems and create an unnecessary burden on employers who are already struggling with a tough economy?

It's difficult to answer these questions objectively, since one's perspective will color one's read of the data. For instance, if you're an advocate for workers' rights, you may look at the spike in EEOC filings and conclude that employers are giving their workers short shrift and cutting corners to survive in the troubled economy. On the other hand, the data could be read differently. Perhaps employers are acting like they always did... but workers are now (for whatever reason) far less tolerant of bad behavior or mistreatment than they had been in the past.

Pulling back from the policy debate and regardless of whether there are more or less issues being reported, it's important to ground this in practical terms if you or someone you care about has been victimized by racial discrimination, retaliation, or any other workplace violation. The legal team at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can provide high-caliber assistance in such matters. Connect today for a free and confidential consultation at www.jhllp.com or (866) 348-7394.