410-290-6232
Recent Blog Posts
Signs that you're subjected to pregnancy discrimination
Being pregnant has its own challenges, but the difficulties can be exacerbated when your employer uses your condition to discriminate against you. You'd think that with state and federal protections, as well as an increased public awareness of workplace discrimination, this behavior would be rare, but it's far more common than many people realize.
And the ramifications of discrimination can be far-reaching. You may find yourself uncomfortable and even fearful at your job on a daily basis, worried that reporting the issue may result in retaliation. And if you do make a complaint, you might be concerned that you'll end up facing reduced hours, changed assignments, demotion, reduced pay or even termination. This is why it's critical to know how to identify pregnancy discrimination and bring it to a stop in a way that protects your interests.
Spotting signs of pregnancy discrimination
One reason why people misperceive the frequency with which this type of discrimination occurs is because they simply shrug off discriminatory practices as inane behavior. But discriminatory practices can lead to adverse employment actions, including demotion, termination or being passed over for a job or promotion altogether.
Time Off Work to Vote
Time Off Work to Vote:
The State of Maryland allows employees to take time off from work to vote without fear of retaliation. In accordance with Maryland law, employees must be allowed to take up to two hours off to vote unless the employee already has at least two consecutive hours off work while the polls are open. This time off must be paid. Md. Code Ann., Elec. Law § 10-315.
In Washington, D.C., upon request to an employer, the employee may take at least two hours of paid leave from a scheduled working shift to vote. D.C. Code § 1-1001.07a.
Your Employer May:
- Require you to submit your request for paid leave to vote a reasonable time in advance of the date you wish to vote; and
- Ask for proof of voting. The employee shall furnish to the employer proof that the employee has voted or attempted to vote.
How are whistleblower federal employees protected under the law?
In Maryland and Virginia, the federal government is a large-scale employer. Since the area is so close to the power hub of Washington, D.C., it is natural that there will be an extensive array of federal agencies that employ a wide swath of people. Although working in the public sector differs from working in the private sector, it is a sad fact that workers are always at risk of being mistreated.
Legal violations can happen regardless of where a person works and it is important to understand the available recourse. Being a whistleblower to report when an employer is violating the law is not easy. Often, people are reluctant to speak out due to fear of retaliation and a negative impact on their future. Before walking away without complaining about wrongdoing, it is wise to understand the law protecting whistleblowers and to have professional help.
How the No FEAR Act helps federal whistleblowers
The No FEAR Act-Notification and Federal Employee Anti-Discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002-was signed by President George W. Bush. Under this law, a federal agency that is found to have violated employment law and retaliated against whistleblowers will be held directly accountable.
World Mental Health Day - ADA in the Workplace
On Monday, October 10, 2022, we celebrated World Mental Health Day to raise awareness of mental health issues worldwide and mobilize efforts to support mental health. Stigma and discrimination continue to be barriers to social inclusion and access to proper care; however, we can all play our part in increasing awareness. The holiday is a step towards making mental health and well-being for all a global priority.
At Freedman Law, LLC, we help individuals against discrimination in the workplace, including those with physical and mental disabilities. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in the workplace.
Critically, in 2008 the ADA was amended with the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA), which changed the definition of the term "disability." The ADAAAA significantly broadened the definition of a disability to make it easier for an individual seeking protection under the ADA to establish that he or she has a disability within the meaning of the statute. The new law made it clear that the definition of disability would be construed as broadly as possible to include anything that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a record (or past history) of such an impairment, or even being regarded as having a disability. In terms of mental health, this often means that mental impairments such as diagnosed depression and anxiety disorders may be protected disabilities. A recent landmark 4th Circuit case ruling in Williams v Kincaid also found that gender dysphoria is covered by the ADA, a holding that is more inclusive towards those who are discriminated against based on their gender identity.
What you need to know about harassment in the fast-food industry
Sexual harassment is more common than most people realize. Yet, certain sectors of the professional world are more susceptible than others to this type of egregious behavior. Amongst them is the fast-food industry. Restaurants in general are problematic when it comes to sexual harassment, with one study showing that 90% of women who work in the industry report having been subjected to sexual harassment. Even 70% of male workers in this industry have indicated that they've been sexually harassed at work.
Sexual harassment in the fast-food industry
Those who work in the fast-food industry can be taken advantage of relatively easily. This is because these workers usually aren't in as strong of a position to protect their rights as those who work elsewhere. For example, fast-food workers are oftentimes subjected to inconsistent scheduling and frequent schedule changes, which means that it can be hard to decipher when retaliation has occurred after sexual harassment has occurred.
Natural Hair in the Workplace
What is the CROWN Act?
The CROWN Act (Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair) was first introduced to Congress in March of 2019. The goal of the Act is to promote equity and inclusivity within the workplace environment, specifically prohibiting prejudicial treatment towards individuals based on their hair texture or protective style. The CROWN Act would prohibit workplace discrimination based on a person's hair texture or hairstyle if that style or texture is commonly associated with a particular race or national origin. The Act's protections include, but are not limited to, dreadlocks, cornrows, twists, braids, Bantu knots, and afros. The CROWN Act protects employees from race-based discrimination relating to their natural hair, such as the denial of job opportunities or promotions. Under the Act, an employee may not be reprimanded for having their hair in a protective style or choosing to wear their natural hair at their place of employment.
Pursuing a discrimination claim as a federal employee
As a federal employee, you have a number of workplace protections. Among them are the standard protections from employment discrimination on the basis of gender, race, color, religion, and national origin that those who work in the private sector enjoy. These protections extend to every aspect of employment, too, from hiring and promotion to discipline and termination. You're also protected from retaliation when you report wrongdoing in the workplace, and you're shielded from sexual harassment, age discrimination, and pregnancy discrimination.
But federal employees are wronged by their employer all the time. When this occurs, these workers can suffer an extensive amount of harm. This is unfair, which is why if you feel like you've been treated unfairly by your employer, you might want to consider taking legal action to protect your interests. But pursuing a discrimination claim against a federal employer looks different from similar claims levied against private employers.
Lower performance reviews: a subtler form of workplace discrimination
A company that refuses to hire qualified job applicants because of their race, gender, age or religious beliefs is violating federal and Maryland employment laws. But there are subtler ways that employers can discriminate illegally.
One such tactic is to systematically give lower performance review scores to members of a protected class - not because their work is of lesser quality, but because the employer wants to pay the protected class employees less.
Lower performance scores for minority Times employees
That is what the NewsGuild union is accusing The New York Times is doing to its employees of color. The union released data that alleges that Hispanic employees are 60 percent less likely to receive a high score on their performance review than their white peers. Black employees only received high scores half as often as white co-workers. The Times uses these scores to determine how large of an annual bonus each worker gets.
Client Prevails Before National Labor Relations Board
Freedman Law, LLC is pleased to announce that our client recently prevailed, winning a full recovery, after a two-day trial in Baltimore, Maryland. Following a full trial on the merits before the National Labor Relations Board, the Honorable Arthur J. Amchan held that our client had been illegally suspended and discharged after he engaged in protected concerted activity, i.e. whistleblower activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act. As a result of the favorable outcome, our client was awarded full backpay damages, possible reinstatement, and interim employment expenses, among other relief.
Prior to his sudden suspension/termination, our client worked as a firearms instructor at a private gun range in Maryland. The gun range had consistent issues with ricocheted bullets coming back towards instructors and students. Our client made multiple safety complaints to upper management leading to his wrongful suspension and termination.
In an attempt to avoid liability, the former employer alleged that this individual was a supervisory employee not covered under the National Labor Relations Act. Moreover, his former employer argued that the company was insulated from liability because of the employee's purported "poor conduct" when raising his legitimate safety complaints. This was not the case.
Nonbinary Pronoun Usage in the Workplace: Promoting Inclusivity
Nonbinary Pronoun Usage in the Workplace: Promoting Inclusivity
According to a recent study, an estimated 11 percent of individuals who identify as LGBTQ in the United States (i.e., approximately 1.2 million people) also identify as non-binary. It is increasingly common for these individuals to go by gender-neutral, nonbinary pronouns, including they/them/theirs, along with others. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued new guidance on June 15, 2021, taking the position that "intentionally and repeatedly using the wrong name and pronouns to refer to a transgender employee could contribute to an unlawful hostile work environment" in violation of Title VII. The EEOC further took the position:
Could use of pronouns or names that are inconsistent with an individual's gender identity be considered harassment?
Columbia Office
10015 Old Columbia Rd, #B215
Columbia, MD 21046
P 410-290-6232
[+] View Map
Rockville Office
199 E. Montgomery Ave., #100
Rockville, MD 20850
P 410-290-6232
[+] View Map
McLean Office
8200 Greensboro Dr, #900
McLean, VA 22102
P 410-290-6232
[+] View Map
Results listed are not a guarantee or indication of future case results.
