Recently in Employment Law Category

When Lockheed Martin Corp. sought to set aside a decision that essentially determined that they violated the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (the Act), the Tenth Circuit ruled against them, affirming the decision of an administrative law judge (the ALJ).

Andrea Brown was a former Lockheed Martin employee who lodged an ethics complaint against Wendy Owen, vice president of communications at Lockheed in Colorado Springs. Brown communicated concerns of fraudulent and illegal activity wherein Owen had developed sexual relationships with several soldiers in Iraq, was sending them sex toys, bought a laptop for one of them, and even booked fancy hotel rooms to meet them when they returned home to the states. These communications were allegedly occurring through an employee pen pal program.

Lockheed, in return, shut down the pen pal program and Owen’s position in the company was not affected.

Telecommuting for work is a hot topic right now, with Yahoo's anti-telecommuting policy setting off a national debate. But if a worker claims he can't make it into work for medical reasons, must his employer allow him to telecommute as a "reasonable accomodation" under the Americans with Disabilities Act? Not always, according to the Tenth Circuit.

The case involved the late Doyle "Rocky" Brown, who was diagnosed with cancer that required surgery. After Brown exhausted his 12 weeks of unpaid FMLA leave, he gave his employer a doctor's note requesting three more weeks of leave. Despite offering to work "against doctor's orders," Brown was fired, in part because of excessive absences.

Brown sued his employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act, arguing they did not provide him with reasonable accommodations such as a telecommuting option. But a lower court held, and the Tenth Circuit later agreed in a February 2012 opinion, that Brown's employer did not, under the ADA, have to accommodate his work absences any further.

Officer Koessel had a stroke. About eight months later, he was cleared to return, full-time, sans overtime. He was assigned to desk duty, though he was allowed to make traffic stops while on his daily commute.

The arrangement didn't last long. His coworkers expressed concerns over his fitness for duty after a captain overheard him becoming flustered after being unable to remember a word during a traffic stop. His duties were then amended again, and he was only allowed to perform backup duties, not initiate stops.

After further reports of emotional issues and a shift cut short by blood pressure issues, he was placed on administrative leave and ordered to undergo medical evaluations.

Bennie Walters sued his former employer, Walmart, for employment discrimination. Walmart apparently reached an agreement with Walters during a settlement conference -- which is suprising since Walmart is kind of famous for its aggressive litigation strategy -- but Walters later refused to sign the written agreement.

The district court granted Walmart's motion to enforce the agreement, and denied Walters' motion for reconsideration. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision.

Frank Brown sued his former employer, ScriptPro, LLC, alleging Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) violations and trying to collect payment for overtime hours he allegedly worked from home. Brown, however, was a non-exempt employee and he didn't log that time.

That brings us -- and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals -- to what we will call the Ke$ha rule of non-exempt compensation: If an employee wants to be paid for his work, it has to be "tik tok, on the clock." Or the payment party will stop.

If you are filing an American with Disabilities Act (ADA) employment discrimination claim on a client's behalf, sue under Title I. Title I authorizes the disabled to bring employment discrimination claims.

Title II offers no recourse for employees, according to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Of course, some employee had to learn that lesson the hard way so everyone else could learn it the easy way.

As the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals describes it, "This case began with an angry bill collector, metamorphosed into a discovery dispute, and now serves mostly as another reminder about the importance of preserving your best arguments in the proper administrative forum rather than trying them for the first time in an appellate court."

Robert Madrid worked for Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM), collecting overdue bills for the electric utility. One day, Madrid got mad at a "particularly obstinate customer" and disconnected the customer's gas line without his supervisor's permission. Making matters worse? PNM didn't even provide the gas service, another utility did.

Denver Broncos linebacker D.J. Williams lost his NFL suspension appeal in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday.

Williams challenged the suspension through NFL arbitration and the federal courts. He claimed that the arbitrator in the matter "exceeded his power, engaged in misconduct, disregarded the law, or was biased," reports The Washington Post. Both District Judge Christine Arguello and the Tenth Circuit panel rejected his claims.

Way back in 1787, when the framers were drafting the Constitution, they included a provision about the application of state laws to federal enclaves. The provision wasn't a big deal like the taxing power, the Necessary and Proper Clause, or the Commerce Clause, but it occasionally pops up in the news.

This week, it popped up in a Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals retaliation claim.

Overstock.com doesn't just sell discounted goods; it also responds swiftly to a sexual harassment claim.

Tuesday, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a former employee's hostile work environment claim against Overstock, noting that the online discounter had done exactly what it needed to do to handle the situation.