Senate Filibuster Blocks Vote to Appoint Goodwin Liu to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

On Thursday, the Senate blocked a final vote on Goodwin Liu, nominated by President Obama for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The 52-43 vote marked the first successful Republican filibuster of an Obama administration judicial nominee. The National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA) had endorsed Liu based on his record of commitment to the progress made on civil rights and individual liberties as well as his demonstrated commitment to and respect for justice and equality in the workplace.

"The failed Senate cloture vote on Goodwin Liu's nomination couldn't have been a clearer example of elevating politics over principle and taking the low road of partisan politics." stated Patricia A.Barasch, NELA President.

Cameron County had Texas' worst unemployment in March

 According to a recent article in The Monitor, Cameron County shed 1,300 jobs and experienced the worst unemployment level of any county in Texas.

Texas Workforce Commission data (PDF) released Friday shows the Brownsville-Harlingen metro area, which covers Cameron County, edged out the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission metro area, which covers Hidalgo County, to claim the unfortunate title.  McAllen-Edinburg-Mission’s unemployment rate was 11.9 percent, just one-tenth of one percent lower than Brownsville-Harlingen’s 12 percent unemployment rate. 

You can read the entire article in The Monitor.

You can view all the March unemployment data from the Texas Workforce Commission here.

 

 

Help - I was disqualified for unemployment benefits. How do I get re-qualified?

You were disqualified for Texas unemployment benefits.  Now what?  How can you get re-qualified for benefits?  Here's your answers:

If the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) disqualifies you from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on a prior claim because of the reason for your job separation or for other reasons, you may be able to close the disqualification through work or wages after you do all of the following:

  1. Go back to work in “employment” after your disqualification begins;
  2. Earn wages equal to six times your weekly benefit amount or work at least 30 hours a week for six weeks;
  3. Give the TWC proof of your work or earnings and request that they close the disqualification.

To receive benefits after closing a disqualification, you must have a qualifying separation from your last job or fulfill the work and earning requirements described above while you are working at a part-time job.

The TWC will not pay you benefits for the time between the beginning of the disqualification and the time that you meet the requirements to close the disqualification.

You can use work or wages from most types of “employment” to close the disqualification.  However, the Texas Unemployment Compensation Act excludes several types of employment from its definition of employment for the purposes of removing a previous disqualification.  These include:

  • Working in domestic service, if the employer pays less than $1,000 in wages during a calendar quarter for all domestic services;
  • Working for yourself;
  • Working for your son, daughter, or spouse;
  • Working for a church; or
  • Working as an insurance agent paid only by commission.

AT&T v. Concepcion - Closing the Courthouse Doors to Employees?

In a big win for employers, the United States Supreme Court held last week that, under the Federal Arbitration Act, an arbitration agreement can prohibit an individual from commencing or participating in a class action.

   In the case, AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the California Supreme Court had established a rule that an employment arbitration agreement was not enforceable if it waived an individual’s right to file a class action.  U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, held that state laws cannot interfere with an arbitration agreement’s elimination of the class action mechanism to resolve disputes.  In my personal opinion the decision, which was authored by Justice Scalia, is extremely outcome-oriented.  It continues the conservative wing of the Court's pro states' rights (unless they inconvenience corporations) stance.  The dissenting opinion does a good job of outlining the logical inconsistencies in the majority opinion.  

   You can download a copy of the opinion here: AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion

   While this was not an employment case, its importance in the employment law arena cannot be overemphasized.  Employers may be able to use this decision to effectively eliminate all employment-related class actions, possibly including wage & hour collective actions for unpaid overtime.  On the other hand, arbitration still has many drawbacks for employers.  The cost of arbitration fees have steadily increased to the point where it is now quite a bit more expensive to arbitrate a case than to litigation in traditional courts.  Additionally, arbitration outcomes are largely unappealable.  These issues are not insignificant. 

   Despite its downsides, however, employers are increasingly inserting arbitration clauses with class-action bans into employment contracts, presenting them to employees on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. The Concepcion decision goes a long way towards eliminating an important means for enforcing longstanding civil rights and employee protections.  The Court's activist efforts fly in the face of public opinion as well:  according to recent polls, a solid majority of Americans (59%) opposes forced arbitration clauses in the fine print of employment and consumer contracts, including both men and women, as well as majorities of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.

   So what is an employee to do if faced with an arbitration agreement?  First, don't just sign anything and everything that an employer puts in front of you. If your employer gives you an arbitration agreement and demands that you sign it, ask to take it home and read it.  Then, visit with your co-workers and consider refusing to sign the agreement as a group.  There is power in numbers.

   Second, call your U.S. senators and your member of congress and encourage him or her to support passage of the Arbitration Fairness Act (AFA) of 2011. The AFA would ban forced arbitration in employment, consumer, and civil rights disputes.

 Read More Related Stories After the Break . . . 

 

 

Continue Reading...