A variety of federal, state and municipal laws protect employees from discrimination in the workplace based on any number of protected characteristics. The exact coverage of these laws, as well as the types of remedies thereunder, vary considerably across jurisdictions.
Many law firms represent only employers or employees. We represent both. We believe that representing both sides in such cases gives us a broader perspective, and as a result we are in a better position to counsel our clients.
All of our attorneys have extensive experience handling employment discrimination claims before local state and federal agencies, and in state and federal court. Our attorneys have obtained favorable outcomes before administrative agencies, and favorable jury verdicts on behalf of both employees and employers in court, and have successfully negotiated numerous settlements of employment discrimination claims on behalf of employers and employees. We provide counseling to employers and employees, including diversity and compliance training to employers. Our employment discrimination practice runs the gamut of discrimination, including discrimination based on race, sex, age, national origin, religion and disability, and including discriminatory discharge, demotion, denial of promotion, compensation, and harassment.
Sampling of Cases
In 2011, we obtained a $3.8 million award before the American Arbitration Association in a case brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act. After several days of hearing, the Arbitrator concluded that the defendant had wilfully violated the ADEA when it had terminated our client for purportedly poor performance.
In 2009, we obtained a multi-million dollar jury verdict on behalf of two scientists formerly employed by PQ Corporation. The jury specifically found that in terminating our clients, PQ wilfully violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Although the trial judge reduced the total verdict from $6.2 million to just under $3 million (not including attorneys' fees and costs), he otherwise denied the Defendant's post-trial motions. In January, 2012, the 3rd Circuit denied PQ's appeal, and granted our clients' cross-appeal, holding that the trial court had improperly denied prejudgment interest and an upward adjustment to take into account the negative tax consequences of the award. It therefore remanded to the district court to consider these additional items, as well as an existing attorneys' fee petition.
We have successfully defended against numerous discrimination claims on behalf of our corporate clients, both before the EEOC, various state and local agencies, and in court.
We have also been engaged by employers to conduct internal workplace investigations of allegedly discriminatory conduct, and have negotiated dozens of settlements of discrimination claims on behalf of our corporate and our individual clients on favorable terms. We have well-established training programs for managers on employment law, as well as our own diversity training program, which has been presented in workplaces throughout the country.
"Prior to our connecting, I never thought there would ever again be any normality to my life . . . .I consider myself incredibly fortunate to have been dropped into the hands of a cool, calm and collected genius who not only knew the law inside and out but was able to keep me level."
@ 2010 Salmanson Goldshaw, P.C. All rights reserved.