Connecticut Employment Legal Questions

Probably not a case unless you were a contracted employee.  If you were an at-will employee, then we would look to see if you are part of a protected class being discriminated against.  How long did you quarantine for? Do you have any at-risk qualities? Auto-immune disseases?  I think this would be difficult but I would need more details.  203.870.6700.... Read Answer

You may have a case under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).  However there are many elements and time limits that must be observed in order to succesfully navigate throught suche a case.  My office would be happy to speak with you further regarding a potential claim. 203.870.6700.  You can also go to the following link provided by the Connecticut Judicial Branch to review and read more about this process.  https://www.jud.ct.gov/ada/Grievance_Proc_SuperiorCourt.pdf... Read Answer

It sounds as though you already answered your own question.  Unless there are other elements at work such as a licensed certified supervisor, you have a problem.  Please feel free to contact us for assistance whether it is to properly set up and incorporate your business or for defense litigation or criminal defense.  Good luck. 203.870.6700... Read Answer

It appears from your facts, that the company may have refused to hire you as a permanent employee because of your disability (epilepsy).  As long as you can perform the essential functions of your job, the company cannot refuse to hire you based on your condition, especially if it was easy for the company to change your shift.  Unless the company can establish that changing your shift was an unreasonable burden to the company, they would have to do this as a reasonable accommodation.  The company will need to provide a logical reason for not hiring you that is unrelated to your condition unless they can prove that your condition poses an unsafe risk to you or others.  Since you have worked there for a year, presumably with no problems, and your doctor will provide a medical note supporting you, it will be hard for the company to prove this. You should speak to an attorney to explore this further.... Read Answer

Severance plans vary widely, and whether or not you get severance depends on the terms of the plan.  In your case it seems as though the terms of the plan require you to work until the closing in order to qualify for severance.  Your employer can impose that term on the plan.  If the closing has been delayed, and you resign to take another position before the closing date, you will probably be considered to have voluntarily quit and therefore not eligible for severance under the plan.... Read Answer

Your wife can still apply for unemployment. The state unemployment board will contact the employer to learn the reason for the termination. If the employer fails to supply the information you will be awarded benefits by default. It doesn't matter that the employer did not provide the information at the time of your wife's termination.   Michael Caldwell 404-979-3150... Read Answer

The answer to your question is a good deal more complicated than you might think.  From the facts you state, I understand the age at which an employee at your company can take retirement under the applicable pension plan is age 62, and that the employee would reach that age on October 1, 2012.  I understand the question to be "If the employee notifies the company and pension plan that he intends to retire effective October 1, 2012, and begin receiving benefits at that time, can the employer fire him?" If that's indeed the question, the answer is technically "yes."  However..........if the employer's decision is motivated by an intent to deprive the employee of retirement benefits, the termination might violate Sec. 501 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).  That provision prohibits an employer from discriminating against an employee in order to prohibit him/her from receiving retirement benefits in some cases.  We must remember however, that unless the employee has a contract of employment, or is a member of a bargaining unit covered by a labor agreement, he or she is usually an "at-will employee" who can be discharged with or without notice and with or without cause.  Generally, then, an employer may terminate an "at-will" employee at any time and without any reason at all.  Therefore, the fact an employee has given the company notice that he/she intends to retire effective October 1 does not prevent the company from terminating him/her between now and October 1.  Only if the employee is terminated because the company wants to avoid paying accrued retirement benefits would the termination be unlawful in the context you describe.... Read Answer