Author: Justin S. Gilbert

Categories
Special Education Law

Tennessee Individualized Education Plans for Special Needs Children

Tennessee Individualized Education Plans for Special Needs ChildrenThe Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) mandates that public schools create an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) for any child who receives special education services. The IEP defines a child’s education needs, what services will be provided, and how success will be measured. It is a written legal document that is prepared with input from the school, the parents, education counselors, and others concerned about the child or qualified to help him/her.

Children can be eligible for an IEP starting at age 3 and running to graduation from high school or age 22, whichever comes first.

New Supreme Court guidance

After years of remaining silent about the IDEA, the United States Supreme Court has weighed in. Endrew F. v. Douglas County School Dist. RE-1, 2017 U.S. LEXIS 2025, at *21 (Mar. 22, 2017). Chief Justice Roberts, writing for a unanimous Court, explained that the IEP guarantees substantial rights to children with disabilities. It lays down a number of important principles.

First, the school must implement an IEP which “enable[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][s] a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” Endrew F., at 349. In other words, the school may not claim “de minimis” (or minor, or trivial) progress is sufficient.  Rather, the progress must be genuine, considering the child’s abilities.

Second, the child’s abilities must include potential, not merely present levels.  The IEP Team must consider the child’s “potential for growth.”

Third, the expertise of school officials remains important but so, too, is the “input of the child’s parents or guardians.”

Fourth, offering “canned” IEPs used for other children with similar disabilities is prohibited.  They must be individualized and designed for each child in particular.

Fifth, when considering the potential of the child, advancement from grade to grade is relevant but the IEP must also consider both “academic and functional advancement.”  This includes behavioral supports and supports beyond pure academics.

You can find the full decision here.

How an IEP can help your child with special needs

An IEP can mean the different between your child’s ability to succeed in school and an ongoing lack of resources that impairs his/her ability to thrive academically. For this reason, parents should understand the components of an IEP in order to best advocate for their child. An IEP contains the following:

  • A statement of the special education student’s present level of performance (PLOP). This document spells out your child’s current strengths and weaknesses. It details your child’s learning difficulties in handling academic courses and normal functioning activities, including the ability to socialize. The PLOP is based on test results and observations by the teachers. The PLOP should change year to year to match the student’s progress.
  • Objective tests. These typically include state and local assessments.
  • Support services. The IEP details what services will be provided during the year, such as speech therapy, psychological counseling, and individualized tutoring. The nature of the services will be tailored to the student’s specific needs.
  • Any accommodations or modifications. Accommodations apply to performance measurements. Adjustments may include more time to complete assessments or the ability to ask questions when taking the standardized tests. Modifications apply to how and what the child learns.
  • These are the academic standards and functional level the child should achieve by the end of the school year. A goal could be, for example, the ability to participate in classroom discussions. For children with multiple disabilities, there short b short-term goals and benchmarks.
  • These are objective assessments that confirm the child is making significant progress. These measurements should be shared regularly with the parents.
  • Effective date. This is the date that the IEP goes into effect.

The IEP should also set forth whether the child will participate in any extracurricular activities. It may, depending on the child’s age, also include a transition plan setting forth the services to help the child graduate from high school and function after high school. An IEP can also address services and support given during the summer months and school breaks, if applicable.

Parents have an opportunity under “Parental Concerns” to list any perceived shortcomings of the IEP. If the IEP lacks ambitious goals or lacks explanations, parents should say so. For example: “This IEP is too vague to understand the goals and the programming is ambiguous.”

The right IEP can help your child progress while the wrong one can limit them. At the Gilbert Firm, our Tennessee IDEA attorneys hold schools accountable when they fail to provide a quality IEP for you child. For more information on IEPs, please call Justin Gilbert at 888.996.9731 or complete our contact form. We have offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson, and Knoxville and represent parents and children throughout the state.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Labor and Employment

Gilbert Firm Fights for Justice for the WUTC Reporter Who Was Unjustly Fired

Gilbert Firm Fights for Justice for the WUTC Reporter Who Was Unjustly FiredLawmakers in Tennessee have a history of punishing the University of Tennessee when they think the school isn’t in alignment with their beliefs. In April of 2016, they pulled $436,000 in funding from UT’s Office for Diversity because the Office suggested – not demanded; suggested – the use of gender neutral pronouns, held an annual event called “Sex Week,” and decided not to use the word “Christmas” at holiday parties. UT lost this funding for a full year as a result.

This bullying, oppressive behavior is in full view once again, after a 32-year-old WUTC reporter named Jacqui Helbert was fired for reporting on what lawmakers had to say about Tennessee’s transgender bathroom bill during a meeting with the Cleveland Gay Straight Alliance. This discussion took place during Advancing Equality Day, in March of 2017.

Despite Ms. Helbert wearing a press pass, holding an oversized, fuzzy microphone, and carrying around radio gear, some UTC officials and state lawmakers claim that they had no idea there was a reporter present during their meeting because Ms. Helbert didn’t identify herself verbally as a reporter. They claim she violated journalism ethics. They claim they didn’t threaten to pull funding from UT if they didn’t fire Ms. Helbert, or remove the story from the WUTC website.

As it turns out, that’s not true. The Times Free Press obtained email correspondence between UTC officials that speaks directly to their fears about funding:

“’The potential repercussions for the state representative and UTC are HUGE,’” UTC Chancellor Steve Angle wrote in an email on March 20. “’We could easily lose all funding we are providing to WUTC.’”

The Associated Press, along with the Times Free Press, obtained these emails through a records request.

To recap: Jacqui Helbert did her job and reported what lawmakers said while at a meeting with the Cleveland GSA. Despite looking, in her own words, “cartoonishly like a reporter,” lawmakers and UT officials claimed they did not know she was a reporter, because she never verbally identified herself – even though there is no rule or regulation in the NPR handbook that mandates she identify herself in this way. Lawmakers threatened to pull funding from the school, a threat substantiated through emails released via official request, and George Heddleston Charles Cantrell made the decision to fire Ms. Helbert. The story was pulled off WUTC’s website shortly after.

Justice for Jacqui

What happened to Ms. Helbert is unconscionable. That Tennessee lawmakers would, in essence, blackmail the University into getting rid of the story and its author, and that UT officials would cave to such demands, thereby violating the First Amendment, feels like something out of the Cold War.

That is why Jacqui Helbert hired Justin Gilbert, of the Gilbert Firm, to represent her in a lawsuit against the University of Tennessee itself, as well as George Heddleston and Chancellor Angle, who ultimately made the decision to fire Ms. Helbert. The defendants violated Ms. Helbert’s First Amendment rights and the Public Employee Political Freedom Act, causing her to suffer retaliation through intimidation and wrongful termination, and have hurt her professional reputation by claiming

The Gilbert Firm is proud to stand with Jacqui Helbert. Protecting the rights of those who have faced retaliation and wrongful termination is what we do. The Gilbert Firm will fight for Jacqui Helbert with the full power of our firm behind her.

The Gilbert Firm provides comprehensive counsel to victims of workplace retaliation and wrongful termination. To speak with a skilled Tennessee employment lawyer, please call 888.996.9731, or fill out our contact form. We maintain offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville.

Categories
Labor and Employment

Occupational Licensing Practices, and Why It’s So Hard to Just “Get a Job”

Occupational Licensing Practices, and Why It’s So Hard to Just “Get a Job”Last year, we talked about a woman named Tammy Nutall-Pritchard, who wanted to make a few extra dollars to make ends meet, and thought she could do so by working a part-time job as a shampooer. As it turns out, she could not take that job because of some pretty strict licensing requirements by the Tennessee Board of Cosmetology.

Ms. Nutall-Pritchard’s story is not unique; the Brookings Institution reports that nearly 30% of the U.S. workforce is guided by occupational licensing laws. That certain occupations require a license makes sense: you wouldn’t want an untrained plumber fixing your pipes, or an untrained surgeon fixing your heart. But as Brookings points out, many states have licensing laws that seem excessive. In Michigan, for example, it takes “1,460 days of education and training to become an athletic trainer, but just 26 to be an emergency medical technician (EMT).”

Which jobs require a license?

Most of the jobs which require a license in Tennessee fall into categories like teaching, medicine, legal services and construction, but there are a few on the list that might surprise you. You need an occupational license to be a:

  • Barber or hair stylist
  • Broadcaster
  • Graphic designer
  • Realtor
  • Makeup artist

Why occupational licenses can make it difficult to find work

There are, of course, benefits to occupational licensing if you are a consumer of goods and services: you know up-front that the person you’re working with has undergone extensive training, and can handle the work you require. But for people who are looking to make a few dollars on the side, the occupational license can get in the way. After all, if you can earn extra money as a graphic designer after your normal day job, or happen to be handy with some makeup brushes (or regular paint brushes), the burden placed on you by licensing boards can be onerous. This is especially problematic when there is no school or program available to help you obtain the license for that one specific thing. It can end up costing you more money than you would have made simply picking up some jobs on the side.

Occupational licenses should be required for a lot of different fields, but we may be due for a reassessment. The additional fees tacked on for consumers, combined with the extra work and costs that are borne by people looking for work, are making life harder for Tennessee workers.

The Gilbert Firm provides comprehensive representation to clients throughout Tennessee. If you believe your rights have been violated, we may be able to help. To schedule a consultation with Justin Gilbert, Jonathan Bobbitt, or another one of our skilled Tennessee employment attorneys, please call 888-996-9731 or fill out our contact form. We maintain offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville for your convenience.

 

Categories
Labor and Employment

What Can a Client Expect to Win?

In an employment law case, what a client can win depends, of course, on the type of law. But in many civil rights cases, where there is age discrimination, disability discrimination, race, sex – to just name a few – the recoveries would include all of your lost wages. Many times, it will include your job back, if you want it. Some people do; some people don’t.

Frequently, there’s an emotional aspect to recovery as well, such as if you’ve suffered worry, trauma, financial distress; there can be an economic component to that as well. In rare cases, there can be what’s called “punitive damages,” which is sort of like a fine or a penalty that is given to an employer. / END TRANSCRIPT

How much is my employment case worth?

There is no “set worth” when it comes to employment law cases. Every case is different, so every verdict or settlement will be different. When you seek compensation, or damages, in a civil lawsuit, they are generally divided into two categories:

  • Economic damages, including lost wages, loss of earning potential, medical expenses (if applicable), and property damage (if applicable), and
  • Non-economic damages, such as mental and/or emotional trauma, or pain and suffering.

In rare cases, where a judge or jury has found the defendant to be in gross violation of the law, our clients (the plaintiffs) may be awarded punitive damages in addition to economic and non-economic damages. These “penalties” are designed to keep the company or individual who caused you harm from taking such an action again, so that others will not suffer the way you have.

Though we cannot guarantee an outcome for your claim, the Gilbert Firm has been very successful in obtaining significant verdicts and settlements on behalf of Tennessee employees, policyholders and students whose rights have been violated.

If you have been hurt, or if your rights have been violated, you have options. The Gilbert Firm represents clients throughout Tennessee, and fights to uphold their rights in the courtroom and in negotiations. To work with Justin Gilbert, or to make an appointment with any of our Tennessee employment law attorneys in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson or Knoxville, please call 888.996.9731, or fill out our contact form.

Categories
Sex Discrimination

Who is Running Chattanooga (or Tennessee, for that matter)?

Who is Running Chattanooga (or Tennessee, for that matter)?A curious thing is happening to our news outlets. Over the course of the last few weeks, we’ve noticed more and more stories that focus on accusations of sexual harassment, on gender discrimination, and on sexism and feminism (and the conflation between the two).

It’s not that these stories aren’t important or newsworthy; they clearly are. What is curious to us is how some of them garner far more discussion (Emma Watson’s Vanity Fair profile, for example) than others, especially at the local level. In 2016, The Chattanooga Times Free Press reported:

  • 92% of Chattanooga’s biggest employers are run by male CEOs
  • 90% of the Directors who sit on the boards of publicly traded companies are male
  • 84% of Hamilton County’s local elected officials are men

So, is this sexism? Is it sex discrimination? Is it both?

To find the answer, we need to look at more than just numbers; we have to look at the ideology behind them. Sexism is defined as “prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.” Sex discrimination “involves treating someone (an applicant or employee) unfavorably because of that person’s sex.” If women applicants were denied these positions simply because they are women, that could be considered sex discrimination. But if women did not apply for these positions at all because they live in a culture that tells them men are leaders, then that is sexism – even if they do not realize it’s happening.

For example: according to the Press, “women are more apt to work and lead in the nonprofit sector than at major businesses. Among the eight women in Chattanooga who head local employers with more than 100 employees, half of them are the top boss at a local nonprofit or government agency.” As one interviewee told the paper, “nonprofits allow women to lead with their heart and passion and, along with their business skills, to achieve what they regard as success.”

There is so much to unpack here. But what is striking to me is that there is this odd and underlying assumption that women must somehow want to lead with their hearts and their passion first, and rely on their “business skills” second, the implication being that men would not.

This is sexism. The idea that women have more heart or more passion, that perhaps women lack the aptitude to lead organically in a capitalistic society, or that they would be influenced by those factors more than a man might, is a sexist assumption. Sexism – this idea that males and females have fundamentally different natures, which can be applied to the business world – is systemic, and these types of belief extend far outside Chattanooga. It is the basis for wage disparity, for the types of jobs women are more likely to apply for (and obtain), and for the roles men and women play in society. Even a stereotype that “seems” positive – women are more nurturing, women are more passionate, etc. – is still dangerous, because these labels set men and women up to fail. (Remember this commercial by Pantene?)

The Gilbert Firm offers comprehensive counsel in the areas of discrimination and sexism in the workplace. Our Tennessee gender discrimination attorneys have built a reputation for handling complex cases with skill and finesse. To schedule a consultation with Jonathan Bobbitt, Justin Gilbert, or another member of our firm, please call 888.996.9731, or fill out our contact form. We maintain offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville.

 

Categories
Special Education Law

A Girl, Her Dog, and a Furry Foot Forward for Disability Rights

A Girl, Her Dog, and a Furry Foot Forward for Disability RightsAs attorneys for students with disabilities, we know just how hard it is to keep fighting against a system that sometimes seems determined to deny our clients’ rights. We also know that for some people, the fight can be overwhelming or even discouraging at times. So, when a hard-fought case ends well for a student, we want to share that good news because it can give hope to so many.

The case is Fry v. Napoleon Community Schools, 580 U.S. __ (2017). If you are unfamiliar with it, the background can be summed up like this: in 2009, Stacy and Brent obtained a service dog, a Goldendoodle named Wonder, to help their daughter Ehlena, who has cerebral palsy. Wonder helped her with balance, moving around school, putting on her coat, and going to the bathroom.

The school district decided it would not allow Wonder. Instead, it offered a human aide to help Ehlena. Dissatisfied, Ehlena filed a lawsuit in federal court in 2012, claiming that the school violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act by denying Ehlena the use of Wonder.

Ehlena’s suit was dismissed by the District Court on grounds that she brought the suit in the wrong place—it said she should have used a state administrative proceeding known as due process, not a federal lawsuit. Ehlena then lost a split decision at the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. But the Supreme Court agreed to hear her case. On February 22, 2017, the Supreme Court unanimously decided that that both the district court and Sixth Circuit got it wrong. Two important features emerge for future cases.

First, the Supreme Court said that a human aide (“two-legged assistance”) was not a substitute for Wonder. Writing for the Court, Justice Kagan said that would be like denying a child a wheelchair because a human being happens to be willing to carry the child.

Second, the Court outlined rules for whether filing an administrative due process complaint, or a federal lawsuit, is proper. That’s a technical issue, but it boils down to whether the child is seeking a “free appropriate education” under a law called the IDEA, or whether the child is seeking something different, such as equal access. If the child is seeking a free appropriate education, then administrative due process is the answer. But otherwise, suits in federal court may be proper. In Ehlena’s case, the Supreme Court said further analysis is necessary to determine this issue.

The End of the Shell Game?

Too often, in Tennessee, parents who file claims for children with special needs face an initial obstacle of the proper legal forum. Often, they are told by schools they have chosen the wrong place. For example, if they file due process under ADA and Section 504, they may be told they should have filed in federal court. But if they file in federal court, they are invariably told they should have filed in due process. It has become a shell game, or a no win proposition.

Fry helps change that. Fry advises administrative judges (and parents and schools) that “[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][t]he only relief that [an administrative judge] can give…is relief for the denial of a FAPE.” Everything else can proceed in federal court. That is welcome relief for parents.

At the Gilbert Firm, we advocate on behalf of Tennessee students whose rights have been violated. To learn more about our services, or to work with an experienced Tennessee special education attorney like Justin Gilbert, we invite you to call 888.996.9731, or to fill out our contact form. We maintain offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville for your convenience.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Education

Gilbert Firm Files Federal Lawsuit on Behalf of Former Ooltewah High School Student

Gilbert Firm Files Federal Lawsuit on Behalf of Former Ooltewah High School StudentJustin Gilbert, founder of the Gilbert Firm, has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of an Ooltewah High School freshman student who was subjected to acts of sexual violence in the form of “hazing.”

The lawsuit names multiple individual defendants, along with the Hamilton County Department of Education and the DBA of Hamilton County Schools:

“This action alleges violations of Title IX, denial of equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and violation of state tort laws, as characterized by their deliberately indifferent conduct to extreme student-on-student sexual harassment and assault and bullying [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][and] history of failure to take appropriate preventive measures, failure to adequately respond to the events, failure to adequately investigate the events, failure to observe Title IX requirements, and failure to offer appropriate assistance to the victim implicates civil rights and the denial of educational opportunities.”

In short, neither the school board, the Department of Education, nor any of the individuals involved in this case failed to protect the student from harm, nor take any appropriate actions to prevent the assault and harassment from starting, continuing or ending.

Bullying, Hazing, Teasing, and a “Boys will be Boys” Mentality

The United States Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights makes an important point: labels used as descriptors (“bullying, hazing, teasing”) do not determine how a school must respond. Where abusive conduct exists, a school must respond in accordance with applicable federal civil rights statutes. See this U.S. Department of Education letter. In this case, the “boys will be boys” mentality, or the “back when I was in school…” mentality, serves to perpetuate the harm. Sadly, in Ooltewah, the “hazing” of freshmen was permitted by the adults in charge, escalating to the point of sexual violence against young men.

At the Gilbert Firm, we advocate on behalf of students throughout Tennessee who have been hurt because of the negligence of school boards, administrations, educators or other students. To speak with an experienced Tennessee education attorney, please contact Justin Gilbert through our contact form, or by calling the firm at 888.996.9731. We maintain offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Special Education Law

When Should a Client Contact Your Office?

[fusion_youtube id=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSGaLKdTM0I” alignment=”” width=”” height=”” autoplay=”false” api_params=”&rel=0″ hide_on_mobile=”small-visibility,medium-visibility,large-visibility” class=””][/fusion_youtube]
Earlier the better is the rule. In an employment case, if you can contact the Gilbert Firm before a termination occurs, there might be some other options that we can help explore. In an education case, if it’s a child with a disability who needs services, contact us early so we can be involved in the IEP process. If it’s a professor or a teacher, contact us before any retaliation occurs, or before a grievance hearing occurs. The earlier we’re contacted, we feel like the more effective we can be.

We help clients at all stages of their disputes, but the sooner we can become involved, the easier it can be to build a strong case. This is especially true for students with disabilities, whose rights are being violated by a teacher, the school or the district itself.

The Individualized Education Program

An IEP is an Individualized Education Program. Students with disabilities must have an IEP as per federal law. It should contain:

  • Annual goals to be met
  • Lists of services provided
  • Information about the student’s current performance
  • Participation expectations, based on the student’s ability
  • A transition plan, including what services will be needed
  • A clear and complete records of dates and places where and when services were provided, and for how long they were provided
  • A way to measure the student’s progress

If you child has a disability, and you are facing pushback from the school, you want a skilled Tennessee special education lawyer on your side as soon as possible, to help you through the process. If the school has failed or refused to issue an IEP, to provide necessary services, or has engaged in illegal segregation or restraint policies, you and your child have options.

At the Gilbert Firm, we protect Tennessee students from dismissive policies, and seek justice when their rights have been violated. To reserve your consultation at one of our offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson or Knoxville, please fill out this contact form, or call one of our Tennessee special education attorneys at 888.996.9731.

Categories
Labor and Employment

Gilbert Firm Files Class Action for Pregnant Women Alleging Kroger, Inc. Has a “Just Send Them Home” Policy

Gilbert Firm Files Class Action for Pregnant Women Alleging Kroger, Inc. Has a “Just Send Them Home” PolicyIn April of 2016, we talked about the class-action lawsuit filed against Kroger for violating the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act because of its overtime policies. Now Kroger is facing a new class-action suit because of its policies regarding workplace accommodations for pregnant women – and the Gilbert Firm’s very own Justin Gilbert is leading that charge as lead counsel in the lawsuit.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court in the Middle District of Tennessee, and its outcome could affect workers in 90 different stores across Tennessee, Alabama and Kentucky. Kroger is one of the largest employers in the United States.

Kroger sends pregnant women home rather than accommodate their restrictions

The story begins with Jessica Craddock, a Kroger employee who was facing a difficult pregnancy. Her doctors gave her a note for her employer that said she could not lift heavy items, because she was at risk of a pre-term delivery if she engaged in that type of activity. For two weeks, a store manager put her on light duty. But after another visit to the doctor, Craddock returned to work and was told that “such lifting restrictions were against Kroger policy and sent her home [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][on unpaid leave], Craddock said. She could return when she had no restrictions, according to the filing,” as reported by The Tennessean.

Craddock’s situation is not unique. Kroger’s policies are in direct violation the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and new case law from the United States Supreme Court in Young v. UPS. Under that Act:

“If a woman is temporarily unable to perform her job due to a medical condition related to pregnancy or childbirth, the employer or other covered entity must treat her in the same way as it treats any other temporarily disabled employee. For example, the employer may have to provide light duty, alternative assignments, disability leave, or unpaid leave to pregnant employees if it does so for other temporarily disabled employees.”

Kroger’s “send them home” policy runs afoul of the law. So, Craddock is now part of the class-action lawsuit against Kroger to force the company to change its policies, so that A) it follows federal laws, and B) treats pregnant women equally to other workers with medical restrictions. Kroger has denied any wrongdoing. They claim it was a “clerical error” that put Craddock on unpaid leave, and that they have not received a copy of the pending suit against them. However, according to Mr. Gilbert, Kroger’s treatment of Craddock is not unique, nor “clerical,” and that the “send her home” result stems directly from its corporate policies.

This case is important for many reasons: not only was Jessica Craddock wrongfully sent home, leading to lost wages and undue stress, but as Justin’s co-counsel points out to the paper, this particular tactic – forcing pregnant women out of their jobs – appears to be more and more common. Kroger is not the only business that engages in these types of illegal activities, but this case could force the grocery store giant to treat its workers equally.

That is what the Gilbert Firm does. We hold Tennessee employers accountable when they violate the laws. For more information about our work, or to schedule an appointment with a Tennessee employee rights attorney like Justin Gilbert, please call 888.996.9731, or fill out our contact form. The Firm maintains offices in Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson and Knoxville, so we are always close by when you need us the most.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]

Categories
Law

Why is Specialization Important in Today’s Practice of Law?

Whether it’s an employment law case, or an education law case, those matters can be difficult; they can be time-consuming and they can be emotional. So you need to feel like you have someone that’s on your team, knows the law, and is going to be prepared to the spend the long hours that’s required.

So whether you hire the Gilbert Firm for an education matter, an employment matter, or an insurance matter, you will get someone who specializes in that area of the law. And that’s necessary in these kinds of cases. We don’t branch out into other areas; we focus on those areas so we make sure our clients get the very best representation in the entire state.

Choose an attorney who knows what to do

You wouldn’t ask your accountant to diagnose your illness; why work with an attorney who doesn’t specialize in the area of law specific to your case? At the Gilbert Firm, our attorneys all focus their practice in four very specific areas of the law:

  • Employee rights
  • Wage and hour/FSLA violations
  • Insurance disputes
  • Special education law

Whether you are being denied fair pay for your work, fair accommodations for your child, fair compensation for an insurance loss or fair treatment at your job, you want a lawyer who can present you with options to move forward. Our team of attorneys has in-depth knowledge of the state and federal laws and statutes governing Tennessee – the type of knowledge that only comes with years of experience and hard work practicing in these areas. You can rely on us to uphold your rights, and help you protect your future.

The Gilbert Firm provides comprehensive representation to Tennessee employees, policyholders and families with special needs students. To schedule a consultation at one of our offices serving Nashville, Chattanooga, Memphis, Jackson or Knoxville, please call 888.996.9731, or fill out our contact form.