If there's one thing that Minnesota legislators appear to enjoy relaying to the public, it's about how focused on being transparent they are, especially as it relates to being selective in spending taxpayer dollars. A recent investigation shows that they aren't forthright with everything, though.
When an employee has many years of experience in his or her field of work, he or she will charge a premium for his or her services, and demand a much higher salary than a freshly graduated worker. It is expected in almost all industries that a more experienced, and therefore, an older worker, is more expensive to employ. They often also require a higher salary because of their responsibilities, such as their financial needs due to raising a family.
There is nothing worse than the thought of suffering an on-the-job injury. Even if you are extremely careful about avoiding an accident, you never know if you could find yourself in a compromising position at some point.
Depending on your age, you may remember when the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into law in 1990.
When an individual chooses to pursue an employment discrimination case, there are different theories of discrimination that can be alleged, depending on the facts of the case. In our last post, we looked at one common theory of discrimination: disparate treatment. As we noted, disparate treatment may be proven by either direct or circumstantial evidence, as the evidence allows.
Previously, we looked briefly at an ongoing discrimination case against UMD involving several former coaches of female athletics. As we noted last time, the university wants the lawsuit thrown out based on undisputed law and facts, though the coaches have a different account of what occurred than the university.
Three former University of Minnesota Duluth sports coaches, all female, are suing the university for a total of $18 million for illegally discriminating against them. The former coaches filed the suit back in 2015, accusing the university of discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation and national origin.
In any employment discrimination case, it is critical for an employee who has been subjected to adverse employment action to work carefully with an experienced attorney to fully establish each element of the discrimination claim, whether the claim falls under state or federal law.
Previously, we began looking at the importance of working with an experienced attorney to build the strongest possible discrimination case. As we noted last time, one of the challenges many discrimination plaintiffs face is making a strong case for illegal discrimination. This is true both of cases involving discriminatory intent, as well as cases involving disparate impact.
Previously, we began looking at when an individual may file a discrimination claim against an employer. As we noted, individuals are not required to file a discrimination complaint through Minnesota Department of Human Rights before filing a discrimination claim under Minnesota law, but they are required to file a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission before filing a discrimination claim under federal law.