Washington Employment Legal Questions

I would immediately contact the U.S. Dept of Labor. They are the ones that enforce issues pertaining to employee benefits like this. Horrible what the employer has done. You have missed out on a lot of market appreciation. I would argue that not only are you owed for the amount he would have deposited, but the amount the portfolio would have appreciated.... Read More

You can sue the company but you will lose and your attorney will make money off of you. Unless your boss gave you a low rating because of your race, gender, skin color, national origin, religion or age, you do not have a basis for suing. Your best bet is to find a better job and say good bye.... Read More

"The first sentence of INA 214(b) states that: "every alien (other than a nonimmigrant described in subparagraph (l) or (v) of section 101(a)(15), and other than a nonimmigrant described in any provision of section 101(a)(15)(H)(i) except subclause (b1) of such section) shall be presumed to be an immigrant until he establishes to the satisfaction of the consular officer, at the time of application for a visa, and the immigration officers, at the time of application for admission, that he is entitled to a nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)." It means that, with limited exceptions, all visa applicants are presumed to be immigrants (and hence not eligible for non-immigrant visas) unless and until they satisfy the consular officer that they qualify for one of the nonimmigrant visa categories. Per section 291 of the INA, the burden of proof is on the applicant. If a non-immigrant visa applicant does not meet this burden of proof to the satisfaction of the consular officer, then by law the alien is considered to be an applicant for immigrant status and should not receive a nonimmigrant visa." You were denied a B1/B2 visitor's visa because, by filing an asylum application for you, your parents demonstrated that you intend to stay in the U.S. It does not matter if you did not sign that application: a consular officer would be justified in believing that the application would not be filed without your knowledge and consent. So now, you will face this problem every time you try to enter the U.S. - you would have to try proving that your circumstances changed and that you will not try to stay in the U.S. beyond the term of your non-immigrant admission. Proving a negative, especially a future negative, is almost impossible; but, if you show to the consul that, for example, you got married, have children, and neither your spouse nor children will be accompanying you to the U.S., or that you found a high-paying job, or started a profitable business, or have large contracts in your own country, you might succeed. As to your present predicament, it is quite special. You see, the requirement to prove that you do not intend to become an immigrant in the U.S. does not apply to H1B visas. So, under the law, you (and your spouse, if you have one) can apply for H1B - and receive it if the application will be done right. This does not mean that USCIS will not deny the application; so you have to be prepared to appeal the denial - and for the resulting delay. To sum it all up: Yes, you can apply for H1B. Just make sure you have a good immigration attorney.... Read More

It all depends on whether you were the victim of discrimination. If you were treated differently then your co-worker for a reason like your race, national origin, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, etc. you may be protected and you should contact the EEOC about making a charge of discrimination.... Read More

This is some chance that the CEO's conduct is legal, but it is not at all clear. The majority shareholder has certain fiduciary obligations to the minority shareholders, and the CEO has certain fiduciary obligations to the corporation. Obviously, spending money for personal needs like this raises some questions. The CEO may try to claim that his Employment Agreement with the corporation say that this is permitted compensation, but even that may be suspect. The rights of a minority shareholder here are limited. In general, minority shareholders can pursue a derivative shareholder action against the corporation, they can sue directly for breach of the majority shareholder's duty to them, or they can bring an action to dissolve the corporation. Not all options, however, are available in every situation. You would need to speak to a lawyer knowledge about corporate shareholder disputes to fully advise you. You should also bear in mind that the corporation will likely pay the attorney's fees of the CEO here.... Read More

Meet with an attorney who handles wage claims and employment matters.  You must be paid for all the time you worked. The harassment may have been retaliation for asking for your wages and that is illegal.  Try to put together a detailed itemization if possible as to the dates and hours you worked and were not paid.... Read More

Very interesting question.  I'm going to give you what will become a very complicated answer, and I can respond only in general terms.  Some people are very sensitive to aromas or odors, particularly perfumes and hair products.  Some persons experience physical symptoms when they encounter these products.  Symptoms can include headaches, lightheadedness and other symptoms which can be so serious that they render the person unable to work around the causative agent.  When these symptoms are present, the person may be unable to perform the essential functions of their position in the presence of the odor and may therefore qualify as disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act or similar state law provisions.  When they so qualify, the employer is required to make "reasonable accommodations" which will permit the aroma sensitive employee to perform his or her job.  In most cases, the accommodation involves prohibiting co-workers from wearing perfumes, or relocating the aroma sensitive employee to a place where he or she will not be exposed to the aroma. Your case is more complicated, since 1) the aroma is not caused by a perfume or something which can be 'removed" from the environment, and 2) the complaining employee is the only one who claims he/she can detect the odor.  I think there is very little likelihood that a "mold or mildew smell" indicates the presence of any health hazard, and therefore there is no reason to require the new employee to undergo some sort of testing.  Further, such testing could well be an invasion of the new employee's privacy.  Also, the complaining employee does not contend the aroma causes any physical symptoms or effects, and it does not appear that the more senior employee us unable to perform the essential functions of his/her position due to the aroma.  Therefore, it does not appear to me that the more senior employee could be defined as disabled under the ADA, and therefore the employer is not required to make any accommodation for him/her. I think the best approach will be to tell the complaining employee that no one else detects the aroma, and that they will have to continue working together.  If the employer has the ability to move the complaining worker to a different location in the facility, that would probably be a good idea but I do not believe it is legally required based upon the facts you have provided.... Read More

Probably yes.  As you know, the law requires that hourly employees be paid time and a half for all hours over 40 in any work week.  There is no legal requirement that employees be paid for holidays, since holidays are not defined as "work time."  If you decide, as a matter of company policy, that you will offer your employees paid holidays, you should be allowed to determine the basis for the holiday pay in each instance.  If the employee would normally work 8 hours on the holiday, the holiday pay could be 8 hours.  If the employee would normally have worked 10 hours on the holiday, 10 hours pay could be allowed.  ... Read More