While we were out...

As you know, the Bulletin has been on hiatus for the last week or so for a holiday break. Now we are back, refreshed and ready to bring you more employment law goodness. First, however, we thought we would start by taking a look at what others were talking about in our absence:George's Employment Blawg has put up a comprehensive analysis of the recent NYC Transit strike entitled: Lessons from the NYC Transit Strike: Who's Right, Who's Wrong? A sample:
Many viewed the New York City transit strike just before Christmas as an illegal powerplay by a bunch of selfish "thugs" with unrealistic economic expectations. I'd have expected most of the vast numbers of New Yorkers whose daily commutes were disrupted to have shared this view.

However, apparently many New Yorkers and other observers sympathize with the strikers and are quite willing to overlook the strike's unlawfulness, considering it morally and economically justified. Some even see it as the long-awaited resurrection of the moribund American labor movement and a turning point in American "class warfare."

Strategic HR Lawyer Blog also went after this topic:

For those of you who think I might be swayed in favor of management here - you're right. The idea the employees are striking over free health insurance when most of the world doesn't get it for free bothers me. The fact that striking is illegal and they decided to do it anyway bothers me. The fact that employees making $60,000 are on strike resulting in other workers making far less having to walk to work bothers me even more. . . Lastly, having just returned from New Orleans . . . I really have no sympathy.

C'mon, tell us what you really think! Labor Prof Blog covered an interesting recent case out of the Middle District of Alabama concerning whether an individual worker should be judicially estopped from proceeding with her gender discrimination and retaliation claim under Title VII because she failed to list her pending Title VII claim as a potential asset for purposes of her Chapter 13 bankruptcy reorganization plan.And finally, Ross' Employment Law Blog covered several interesting developments over the break. First, the $172,000,000 verdict against Wal-Mart for wage law violations. Secondly, he covers a ruling against the Sidley Austin Brown & Wood law firm in its ongoing litigation with the EEOC over whether its "partners" are actually employees and, therefore, entitled to the protections of the ADEA. And lastly, Ross has a post and links to the Department of Labor's new regulations on the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act (USERRA).

Sexual Harassment, Pregnancy Discrimination, Age Discrimination, San Antonio, Employment Lawyer