Age Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Google

A sixty-four year old worker represented by Kotchen & Low, DVG Law Partner and VK Vandaveer PLLC has filed a federal class action lawsuit against Google, Inc. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a proposed class of workers age 40 and older whom Google did not hire in alleged violation of Federal and California age discrimination laws. According to the Complaint, as a result of Google’s hiring practices and discrimination, the median age of Google’s workforce is 29 years old.

The attorney-author of this article, Michael Brown of DVG Law Partner, is among the attorneys representing the workers who filed the lawsuit, along with attorneys Daniel Kotchen, Daniel Low and Michael von Klemperer of Kotchen & Low LLP and Vonda K. Vandaveer of V.K. Vandaveer, PLLC.

Please contact attorney Michael Brown at (920) 858-2265 or mbrown@dvglawpartner.com if you have any information or questions relating to the case.

Scroll or click the link below to review the Complaint, which details the case’s allegations that Google discriminated against job applicants age 40 and older in violation of age discrimination laws:

The lawsuit has been discussed in these news sources: ComputerworldHR GrapevineLaw360The Mercury News [SiliconBeat]Slashdot, and The Wall Street Journal.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Tata Consultancy Services, Alleging Discrimination Against U.S. Workers

The attorney-author of this article, Michael Brown of DVG Law Partner LLC, and co-counsel filed a federal class action lawsuit against Tata Consultancy Services, Ltd. (“Tata”). The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a proposed class of non-South Asian individuals who Tata did not hire and/or who faced an adverse employment action once hired by Tata (e.g., termination, demotion, etc.). The lawsuit alleges Tata discriminates against individuals who are not South Asian (or of Indian, Nepalese, or Bangledeshi national origin) in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1866. According to the Complaint, as a result of Tata’s discrimination, its United States-based workforce is approximately 95% South Asian, primarily Indian.

The attorney-author Michael Brown is among the attorneys representing the workers who filed the lawsuit, along with attorneys Daniel Kotchen, Daniel Low and Michael von Klemperer of Kotchen & Low LLP and Vonda K. Vandaveer of V.K. Vandaveer, PLLC.

Please contact attorney Michael Brown at (920) 858-2265 or mbrown@dvglawpartner.com if you have any information or questions relating to the case.

Below, you can review the Complaint, which details the case’s allegations that Tata discriminated against non-South Asians in violation of discrimination law:

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Determining Severance Leverage: Five Questions You’d Need Answered (But Couldn’t Answer Yourself)

If you have been presented with a severance agreement, you may have leverage to negotiate a better agreement and higher payment.  However, most workers who have such potential leverage do not capitalize from it.

Why not?  The reasons are many.

Most workers simply fail to recognize their best potential legal rights, claims and leverage. Workers lack the expertise needed to diagnose legal rights, a task best left to an employee rights attorney who has the experience and skill set for such an evaluation. Many, like me, have dealt with thousands of severance, litigation and settlement scenarios. Believe it or not, we’ve learned a lot from those experiences, not to mention the years of education from sources that are much more comprehensive and detailed than the incomplete and scattershot summaries that can be self-perused on the internet.

Unfortunately, many workers who fail to recognize their best legal rights also believe they can self-diagnose their legal rights and severance leverage. Worse, they almost always misdiagnose their rights and leverage. Worse yet, they often reference their misdiagnosed legal rights to the employer, and often move negotiations backward as a result.  Employers usually do not make the mistake of self-diagnosis, and usually consult with an attorney before making employment-law related decisions.

It is easy for workers– especially professional and managerial types who are generally good problem-solvers– to think they can effectively diagnose their potential legal rights and severance leverage.

Maybe you think you can. After all, you know the facts of what happened to you. You can read. You understand the information on EEOC’s website or on this blog or other resources that talk about legal rights.  You can (you may think) take your facts, apply your knowledge of the law from the resources you read, and (here’s where things usually get way off-track) put it all together with a valid legal diagnosis and negotiation strategy.

Before you head off on the route of legal self-diagnosis and severance negotiation– the route of effective negotiation, that is– you’ll need answers to the following five questions.

(1) What are all of your potential legal claims?

(2) What range of results, i.e. specific monetary and non-monetary results, is theoretically possible for each potential claim?

(3) What realistic range of results is likely for each potential claim, based on real-world chances of success for those claims and real-world behavior of judges and others potentially involved in the processes at hand?

(4) Why should your opposing employer take you seriously if you mention potential employment law rights or litigation but you are not represented by a employment litigation attorney?

(5) Is the final offer you’re considering a good one, in light of the factors above?

These are questions that could be answered, and answered well, by a competent employee rights attorney. I have dealt with thousands of workers– many, I freely admit, much smarter than myself– but have never met one who could answer all the important questions above. Or even the majority of them, for that matter. That is because the answers depend on years of legal research and experiences that a non-lawyer simply doesn’t have.

If you want an employee rights attorney to answer the questions above for you, before any negotiation of your severance occurs, many of us are willing to have a free initial consultation to discuss such answers. A free consult is not bad. Especially as compared to the costs and lost opportunities that self-help often brings.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Dangers of Bad Message-Board Advice to “Go File a Legal Complaint With ______”

Internet message boards about legal issues can be helpful for (1) general educational information; (2) looking for attorneys who seem to know what they’re talking about, so you can contact one; and (3) familiarizing yourself with issues that you could raise with an attorney when discussing potential legal rights. But message boards are usually terrible places to get ADVICE to ACT upon.

One common example of terrible message-board “advice”: the adviser who reads your question and replies you should “Go file a legal complaint with [name of govt. agency, etc.].”  Often, such advice comes from non-attorneys.  Sometimes, even attorneys will make this horrific and flip message-board statement to “Go file a complaint…”: when an attorney does this, it’s almost always someone who doesn’t practice in the area of law they are talking about.

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Employee Info/Tips - Pre-Litigation - Considering Compl, Employee Info/Tips - Pre-Litigation - Hiring an Attorne

Wisconsin Bar Article References this Blog, Author

The Wisconsin Bar posted an article about legal blogging, and the article referenced this blog and me (Michael Brown, the attorney-author).  While the article’s audience is attorneys, it is good for you blog readers– non-attorneys and attorneys alike– to consider the purposes of legal blogs like this one.

Attorney-authors such as myself are motivated to blog, at least in part, to market ourselves and gain clients.  That’s the “selfish” motive I’m quoted about in the article.  I also speak about an unselfish motive: trying to help people who are unlikely to ever become clients.  Many issues I write about are for purposes of general information, and are not geared to any particular situation where a reader would be inclined to contact me or sign me up as an attorney.  Examples of this include recent articles about how a good case is like a three-legged stool, and about a study of employment discrimination settlement values.  These type of general eduction articles are not going to cause people to rush and sign me up, and that’s not the intent. There are some things that I just think are helpful to know, so I throw it out there, hoping it’s of some use, somewhere.

And of course, I write about situations where I am hoping people DO contact me with client inquiries.

In those situations, I do my best to approach client matters as win-win scenarios.  If I’m retained on contingency basis, I am paid when my client is paid more (win-win).  If another client pays me an out-of-pocket fee, I want that client to wind up with a greater financial outcome than what’s paid.  My clients are usually successful in those regards.  So hopefully, the “selfish” marketing aspect of blogging is bettered by the fact that win-win representation is the goal.

Which brings to mind a few parting thoughts.  You should always consider– and ask a potential attorney before hiring him or her, if you don’t know the answers–  these questions: (1) What does the attorney stand to gain from my matter? (2) what do I stand to gain with the attorney’s assistance?  The answers should be favorable for you as a potential client.

A final note about legal blogging– what you read is NOT legal advice! Can’t say that enough.  Blogs can be helpful in that they provide general educational information, and may make you consider issues you have not considered before.  But to get legal advice for YOUR situation and details, you would of course need to individually consult with an attorney.  And no, it does not need to be me, and of course it’s your decision in the first instance whether a given issue is important enough to you to discuss with any attorney, or to read any blog posts about.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

A Good “Case” Is Like a Stool: It Has These Three Legs

Workers often contact me, wanting to know if they have a good employment-law “case”.  Every situation is different, and this blog post can’t say if you have a good potential case.  However, there are some general factors that are usually present with good employment cases.

A very good attorney I know, Avi Berk, told me a good analogy for what makes a good case.

A good case, Avi said, is like a stool.  A stool has to have three legs. If even one of the legs is missing, the stool falls over and there is no case (regardless how strong the other two legs may be).

Here are the three stool-legs that support good employment law claims.

Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under Considering Legal Action - Employee, Employee Tip - Considering a Legal Action

You Seek an Employment-Law Answer: But Are You Asking the Wrong Question?

If you lost your job or were presented with a severance agreement, your mind may be riddled with employment-law related questions.

An example of a very common question: How do I request my personnel file?

What if I told you that most of the time workers ask themselves this question, it is the wrong question to be asking? That is,workers seeking an answer to this question– or seeking an employee file– are often taking the wrong steps and more often than not won’t help themselves.

There are several factors that often make requesting a personnel file a bad or unhelpful endeavor.

First, a personnel file is usually not useful for any personal or career purpose after a job has ended.

The file may be helpful if the employee later pursues a dispute or legal claim. But employers know this as well.  So employers often interpret a personnel file request as a signal the requesting employees want to sue the employers. Is this a message that you want to send? That you want to send now? If you just lost your job and have yet to receive unemployment benefits, you may not want to rile up the employer when they are in a position to contest unemployment. And if you are in fact planning legal action, you may not want to signal that to the employer at an early stage. An attorney may advise you to wait and request personnel documents later, perhaps during litigation, so the employer is not tipped off.

These issues and others rarely occur to fired workers seeking answers about personnel file requests.  But such issues are, in fact, usually more important than the common question about how to request a personnel file. (Incidentally, the answer is here).

The personnel-file request question is just one of many common questions workers ask that are often wrong questions to ask.

Before you get dead-set on pursuing a particular legal question or course of action, consider the possibility you may be asking the wrong question or going down the wrong path. Consider researching more legal information or speaking with an attorney if the issue is important or valuable enough to ensure you’re on the right path.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized