- What are Protected Concerted Activities?
- Workplace Harassment Claims: Lack of Intent is No Excuse
- Temporal Proximity and Retaliation Claims
FMLA Leave Does Not Shield An Employee From Disciplinary Action Unrelated To The Leave lexology.com/library/detail…
Have a Legal Question?
- Goldman & Ehrlich recently obtained a decision in December 2014, for one of its clients against Cook County based on the County’s retaliation against an employee who testified on behalf of the union at a Labor Board hearing. The County removed the employee from her position and refused to place her in any other position in retaliation for the employee’s union activities. The County has been ordered to pay the employee all her lost wages and to reinstate her.
Goldman & Ehrlich has successfully represented municipal, county, state and federal government employees.
The hearing was held before the Illinois Labor Relations Board, ILRB Case No. L-CA-13-007
- On May 31, 2012, Attorney Jonathan C. Goldman of Goldman & Ehrlich obtained an award of backpay, compensatory damages, and attorneys’ fees on behalf of a United States Postal Service truck driver in a race, national origin, and retaliation claim before an Administrative Law Judge at the EEOC in Chicago. After three days of testimony, the EEOC issued a decision in favor of the employee finding that the Employee’s supervisors violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by falsely issuing discipline, following the employee from station to station, subjecting him to repeated, unwarranted investigations and discharging him. The United States Postal Service has issued a final agency decision adopting the decision of the EEOC.
- Board of Educ. of Community Consol. School Dist. No. 54 v. Spangler, 328 Ill.App.3d 747(2002)
- Nawrot v. CPC Intern., 277 F.3d 896 (2002): Hughes v. Brown, 20 F.3d 745 (1994)
- Cirro Wrecking Co. v. Roppolo, 153 Ill.2d 6 (1992): Mahoney v. City of Chicago, 293 Ill.App.3d 69 (1997)
- In re: Jacobs, 448 B.R. 453, Bkrtcy.N.D.Ill., January 25, 2011
- Alcazar-Anselmo v. City of Chicago, Slip Copy, 2010 WL 2836979, N.D.Ill., July 16, 2010 (NO. 07C52463D921, 07C52463D9214F2612, 07C52463D9214F26124F)
- Alcazar-Anselmo v. City of Chicago, Slip Copy, 2011 WL 3236024, 94 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 44,266, N.D.Ill., July 27, 2011
- Legal Victory against the City of Chicago
- Attorney Arthur Ehrlich Wins the Case against USPS