West Virginia Employment Legal Questions

Yes, you may sue for your injuries caused by the faulty wiring of the heater outlet. There are several electrical code issues that implicate the electrician and even builder. It is more difficult to sue your employer- you must prove that they knew about the dangers and ignored them. You should speak with a skilled personal injury lawyer about your claim as soon as possible to ensure that you do not forfeit your legal rights.... Read More

You haven't really given me enough information to allow me to give you an answer.  I'm assuming your employer will pay you for the actual time you are "called out."  Do I understand your question to be "does my employer have to pay me for time when it requires me to be available to work even though I'm not scheduled and the "call out" is not an emergency?"... Read More

I'm assuming your job is properly classified as "exempt" under both federal and state minimum wage and maximum hours laws since you really do not provide sufficient information for me to evaluate your classification status.  IF you indeed qualify as "exempt" under the law, you can be required to work as many hours as needed to do the job without receiving additional pay.  Only employees who are "hourly" or "non-exempt" are entitled to overtime pay after they have actively worked 40 hours in a workweek.  An employee who is "exempt" is "exempt" from the requirement that the employer pay them overtime.  ... Read More

While it depends on the reason you would claim the termination was "wrongful," you usually have 2 years to file suit.  Remember, however, that just believing you were treated unfairly does not amount to "wrongful termination."  You would have to prove that the termination was because of your age, race, sex, (or some other status protected by law), because you were a "whistle blower," because you are disabled, because you exercised some right guaranteed by law ("concerted activity" such as seeking to have a union represent you), or that the discharge was in retaliation for you participating in some protected conduct (such as an investigation by the West Virginia Human Rights Commission, etc.).  If you believe you were discharged for any of these reasons, we would recommend you contact a good labor and employment lawyer promptly and have him or her evaluate your situation.... Read More

The supervisor may be creating a "hostile work environment" which constitutes sex discrimination prohibited by the West Virginia Human Rights Act (as well as Title VII under feder law).  Where the conduct of employees (and it does not necessarily have to be a supervisor) creates a "sexually charged" environment which is sufficiently pervasive that it interferes with a reasonable person's ability to perform the functions of their job(s), a "sexually hostile work environment" may exist.  Remember that a single event or even a series of such events over a longer period of time might be considered "shop talk" and may not be considered "sufficiently pervasive" to create the hostile work environment. Where a supervisor is the one creating the hostile work environment, the employer would be charged with knowledge of, and acquesence to, the conduct in most cases.  As such, the employer could be liable for the conduct. We regularly provide training for our clients designed to assist them in detecting and preventing such conduct.  We point out that under West Virginia law, not only the employer but also an individual supervisor may be held liable for any violation, and we teach that the employer should not tolerate such conduct. I suggest you contact the West Virginia Human Rights Commission. ... Read More

No.  Notification can be made at any time after the employer makes the decision to suspend the employee.  In addition, it is not always possible to notify the employee immediately since the employee may not be at work, may be at another location, or may otherwise be unavailable when the decision is made.... Read More

There is actually a case decided by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals on this point.  In Haynes v. Rhone-Poulenc, the WVSCA held that complications resulting from pregnancy constitute a disability under W.Va. law, and that an employer must offer the employee "reasonable accommodation" for that disability, including but not limited to modification of leave policies to allow the employee to return to work after the medical leave.  In such cases the fact the condition is pregnancy related usually means the employer should have a reasonably good idea when the employee will return to work, and therefore may be required to hold the position - or an equivalent position - open pending the woman's return.  Whether or not that applies in your case, however, would depend on the specific facts of your case such as 1) whether the employer had to fill the position our of "business necessity," 2) whether the employer could have continue to hold the position open by using a temporary employee, etc. 3) whether your doctor had provided the employer with a specific date upon which the physician anticipated you would be cleared to return, and 4) whether the employer had an available position at the time you were released to return.... Read More

HIPAA prohibits the disclosure of private medical information without the patient's authorization.  However, you don't really give enough information to determine whether there has been a violation here.  First, we need to know where the medical records were kept.  If they were being maintained by your employer, then the employer has an obligation to maintain the confidentiality of the records.  We also need to know who "disclosed" the records without authorization.  For instance, if your medical records were being maintained by your employer (and I would be curious as to why an employer would maintain detailed medical records regarding employees unless the employer is a health care provider), it would be a violation of HIPAA for the employer to disclose the information.  You indicate that someone "found" the records, so we don't know whether the records were disclosed by the employer.  About all we can say here is that any entity which maintains detailed medical records concerning an employee has an obligation to keep those records confidential unless the employee/patient authorizes their disclosure. ... Read More

Probably not, BUT................. You should understand that any company owned cell phone, computer or other "electronic device" is the property of the company.  Therefore, anything transmitted or received using the equipment is subject to monitoring by the company and you should have no expectation of privacy when you use it.  From a technological standpoint, it would be difficult for the company to "listen in" on your phone conversations, but it can certainly see and monitor and see any text messages, e-mails, photos, "search histories", etc. which are transmitted or received using the device.... Read More

Methadone is a controlled substance.  So is oxycontin and similar drugs, all of which are prescribed by licensed physicians for a variety of conditions.  However, all of these drugs show up on a drug test and the test can be reported as a "confirmed positive" by the Medical Review Officer.  The employer can refuse to hire you if the drug test is reported back as a "confirmed positive." ... Read More

I'm not completely sure I understand what happened here, but I can give you some very general information.  First, you probably can't sue the doctor's office since it seems to me they did everything they were required to do.  In many cases, an employer uses a "third party administrator" to handle FMLA and other medical leave matters.  If the "Agency" you refer to is a TPA for the employer, it looks as though the TPA did what it was required to do as well.  Under the FMLA, an employer may treat a medical absence as FMLA leave time, and your employer apparently did that.  Though you mention "being terminated," you haven't really given me enough facts to allow me to give you any guidance on that.... Read More

In West Virginia, drug testing falls into several categories; "post-offer" testing (used to be called "preemployment" testing), random testing for people whose jobs are "safety sensitive", and "for cause" testing.  If an employer is going to test employees, it is important to have a policy which prohibits the possession, use, sale, etc. of drugs at work, and also tells employees that they will be tested.  Whether an employee can be tested depends on what the policy says and not on whether the employee is part time.    If the policy (or an employee handbook covering part time workers) requires all employees in the same category ("safety sensitive" for instance) to be tested, then all employees in that category could be tested, including part-time employees, even if a supervisor or other company representatives has told them otherwise.  The oral statements by a supervisor usually can't alter the terms and application of the policy. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals held in Twigg v. Hercules Power Company, that drug testing invades an employee's right of privacy, but later cases such as Baughman v. Wal-Mart have allowed testing in a variety of circumstances. The law is pretty complex in this area.  If you believe your right of privacy has been improperly invaded you should check with your attorney for specific advice and guidance.... Read More