El Paso: (915) 996-9798   Las Cruces: (575) 618-2833

News Wrongful Termination, Workers' Compensation and Work Injuries

What do you do when you first have a work injury?

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Monday, 09 Jul 2018.

If your employer carries workers' compensation what is the first thing that you should do?  I see people every week who come in to see me because they are hurt and can't work and they never filed a workers' compensation case.  This nearly always happens when someone has a general no specific injury like a back injury or hernia.  In Texas you have 30 days to file a claim with your employer of your injury.  This is one of the most, if not the most important task for an [read more]

At-Will Employment in New Mexico. But there exceptions.

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Monday, 09 Jul 2018.

In New Mexico at-will employment is still alive and well.  In Melnick v. State Farm the Court stated that  "Employers are entitled to be motivated by and to serve their own legitimate business interests, and they must have wide discretion and flexibility in deciding who they will employ in an uncertain business world." The employers' interests in conducting their businesses as they see fit must be balanced with the interests of their employees in keeping their jobs. Prote [read more]

Implied employment contract in New Mexico.

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Monday, 09 Jul 2018.

New Mexico follows the at-will employment doctrine that states that absent a contract, your employer can fire you for any reason that is not an illegal reason or against public policy.  The key words here is "absent a contract" because under New Mexico law your employer can easily create an implied contract.  An implied contract is one that implied by the situation.  One of the easiest ways for an employer to create an implied contract is in the employee handbook.  I [read more]

Can you sue your employer for your injuries if they have Texas Workers' Compensation.

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Sunday, 08 Jul 2018.

I have a lot of clients in Texas that come see me when they are severely injured at work asking if they can sue their employer for the injuries they receive.  Texas is unique in that it does not require an employer to carry Texas Workers' Compensation.  Every other state, including New Mexico require employers to carry workers' compensation insurance.  Some of the biggest employers in Texas do not carry workers;' compensation insurance.  Many, in not most trucking co [read more]

Do older women face more discrimination than younger women and can older women sue for sex discrimination when a younger woman is treated better?

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Sunday, 08 Jul 2018.

Do older women face more discrimination than younger women and can older women sue for sex discrimination when a younger woman is treated better? This is down as "sex plus age" discrimination.  Believe it or not the law is not settled on whether an older woman can claim sex (gender discrimination) based on a combination of being an older woman.  The scenario usually goes something like this:  An older woman applied for a promotion but is denied the promotion and a [read more]

What does a woman have to prove to show she is paid unequally?

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Monday, 09 Jul 2018.

Recently a Federal District Judge in Texas held that in this case, the woman stated in a deposition that she knew similarly situated men earned “more” than her. She did not know their exact salaries or how much “more,” only that they were paid “more.” She was allowed to proceed with her case to a jury because the employer did not come forth with evidence showing that it was not true.  Would this court hold on appeal to the 5th Cir?  I doubt it, because in a recent similar [read more]

5th Circuit says employer who tried to PIMP out female employees was not liable because employee had no damages.

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Wednesday, 11 Jul 2018.

Davenport v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., 891 F.3d 162 (5th Cir. 2018) the 5th Court held  that trying to PIMP out a female employee was not a tangible benefit lost by the female employee because she refused to be "whored out". This case involves the question whether a supervisor’s offer of an extra benefit to induce an employee’s submission is a “tangible employment action” if the employee refuses to submit and does not receive the extra benefit. A supervisor asked t [read more]

5th Cir. says that making ageist comments to employees is no evidence of discrimination -- again!

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Thursday, 05 Jul 2018.

Gonzales v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 12646 (5th Cir. 2018) (unpublished). The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals states that if your supervisors tells you that you reminded him of his elderly, deceased mother is not evidence of age discrimination.  This is in a long line of cases where the 5th Cir, despite the US Supreme Courts rejection keeps claiming anything said to a fired employee about their age is just an isolated comment and evidence of discriminatio [read more]

Truck drivers are not allowed overtime if their trucks are over a certain weight, but they, not the employer must prove the weight of the vehicles.

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Thursday, 05 Jul 2018.

Employees subject to certain Department of Transportation standards under the Motor Carrier Act are exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirements, but the exemption depends on details including the weight of the vehicle a driver operates. The Fifth Circuit held that a plaintiff driver bears the burden of proving the weight of the motor vehicle, and the plaintiffs’ overtime claims in this case were properly dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to produce evidence of vehi [read more]

Texas Supreme Court holds that "Sex Talk" between same sex employees by itself is not discrimination

Written by Mr. Roger Davie on Thursday, 05 Jul 2018.

Alamo Heights Independent School District v. Clark, 544 S.W.3d 755 (Tex. 2018)  The Texas Supreme Court stated that harassment is illegal “discrimination” only if it is “because of” sex or some other protected characteristic. The Court held that harassment that is merely “about” sex is not, standing alone, sex “discrimination.”  Thus sex talk that is offensive is not necessarily harassment if it is for no other purpose. In this case, the plaintiff alleged “same sex” se [read more]