Tue, 21 May 2013 21:53:11 -0600WeeblyFri, 17 May 2013 15:31:54 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/05/illinois-social-media-law-exception.htmlRecently the Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act was passed which prohibits employers and prospective employers from requesting passwords or related account information to access (prospective) employees' social networking profiles.

However, Senate Bill 2306 carves out an exception to that existing law. 

If the password or access sought by the employer relates to a professional account and not a personal account, nothing in the provisions otherwise prohibits an employer from complying with a duty to screen employees or applicants before hiring or to monitor or retain employee communications as required under Illinois insurance laws or federal law or by a self-regulatory organization as defined in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

This exception passed the Senate on third reading and is currently in the House.
]]>Tue, 14 May 2013 15:22:39 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/05/res-judicata.htmlThe Seventh Circuit issued a ruling in Dookeran v. County of Cook, Illinois, No. 11-3197, on May 3, 2013.  The Seventh Circuit held that the District Court did not err in granting employer Cook County’s motion to dismiss the employee's Title VII action based on res judicata grounds.

The employee alleged that Cook County denied of his application for reappointment to the medical staff because of his race and national origin.  The claim was dismissed because the employee failed to include his Title VII claim in his prior certiorari action that he had filed in Cook County Circuit Court that also sought appeal from said denial of his application for reappointment to said staff. 

The Seventh Circuit noted that both Title VII and certiorari actions satisfied the identity of causes of action element of res judicata test where both actions concerned same transaction, and there was no jurisdictional impediment to plaintiff including his Title VII action in his 2006 certiorari action. 

Illinois Appellate Court decisions prior to the Illinois Supreme Court decision in Blount, 904 N.E.2d 1 (2009), prohibiting plaintiffs from bringing Title VII actions in circuit court did not require different result. ]]>Mon, 06 May 2013 16:32:05 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/05/smiley-v-columbia-college-chicago.htmlOn April 30, 2013, the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion in Smiley v. Columbia College Chicago, No. 10-3747.

The Seventh Circuit held that the District Court did not err in granting Columbia College's motion for summary judgment in employee’s Title VII action alleging that she was terminated from her part-time instructor position because of her race and/or national origin.

Columbia College investigated a complaint received from one of her students alleging that Smiley had isolated and singled him out for being Jewish. The record showed that Columbia College made termination decision after interviewing the student and Smiley, during which Smiley acknowledged that her teaching style involved goofing around with her students and teasing them. Therefore, Columbia College could properly conclude that Smilely's termination was warranted based upon expectation that its instructors would teach classes in professional manner. 

The Seventh Circuit rejected Smiley's claim that Columbia College's investigation into the student complaint was deficient because it failed to interview other students in her class, where record showed that Columbia College's other investigations occurred in similar manner. 

Further, Columbia College's procedures did not require it to contact other witnesses to alleged discriminatory conduct, and the school’s investigation of the complaint does not indicate that its reason for telling her it would not ask her to teach more classes was pretextual.]]>Sat, 04 May 2013 15:12:32 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/05/choate-speaking-for-law-week1.htmlAntoinette Choate will be speaking today on employment law (focusing on employee rights) in honor of Law Week at a Chicago Public Library.  The program is designed to offer free legal information on today’s hot legal issues. The program features a presentation by an experienced attorney, followed by a brief question-and-answer session on five legal topics.

Date: Saturday, May 4
Time:  1:00 p.m. through 3:00 p.m.
Location: Betsy Coleman Library
731 E. 63rd Street, Chicago
]]>Wed, 01 May 2013 15:58:45 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/05/majors-v-general-electric-co.htmlOn April 16, 2013, the 7th Circuit Ruled in Majors v. General Electric Co., No. 12-2893.

The case was brought pursuant to the ADA, alleging that GE denied Majors a temporary position because of her shoulder condition, which precluded her from lifting more than 20 pounds. 

The Seventh Circuit held that the District Court did not err in granting the employer’s motion for summary judgment because Majors failed to establish that she could perform essential function of her position, namely lifting more than 20 pounds, and her only proposed accommodation of having someone else perform said lifting duties was unreasonable. The fact that GE allegedly rejected Majors's proposal without offering counter-proposal did not require different result. 

Additionally, Majors failed to present sufficient evidence to establish a retaliation claim based on GE's failure to award her overtime after filing EEOC charge, where her proposed comparable co-workers, who received more overtime, held positions with different job classifications. 
]]>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:36:03 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/04/foia-requests-in-illinois.htmlHouse Bill 2747 amends 5 ILCS 140/3 to allow written Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to be submitted to a public body by electronic mail. It further requires each public body to post an email address where requests for public records may be directed.  

The Bill passed in the House on March 22 and was sent to the Senate that day.
]]>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 19:57:14 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/04/hall-v-city-of-chicago.htmlOn March 29, 2013, the Seventh Circuit ruled in Hall v. City of Chicago, No. 11-3279. The Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded, holding that the district court erred in granting the employer’s motion for summary judgment in Title VII. 

The employee presented evidence of both objective and subjective hostile work environment where the supervisor: (1) isolated the employee from the otherwise predominantly male workforce; (2) assigned her only menial jobs; and (3) subjected her to periodic episodes of verbal intimidation (including an occasion where the supervisor indicated that he “ought to slap that woman,”) which suggested that his animus was related to her gender. 

The fact that each action individually was insufficient by itself to establish hostile work environment did not require a different result.
]]>Mon, 15 Apr 2013 19:30:59 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/04/choate-at-chicago-public-library.htmlOn April 15, 2013, Antoinette Choate spoke on employment law (focusing on employee rights) at Harold Washington Library as part of a joint program with the Chicago Public Library and the Chicago Bar Association.

The Law at the Library program is designed to offer free legal information on today’s hot legal issues. Each Law at the Library program features a presentation by an experienced attorney, followed by a brief question-and-answer session.
]]>Thu, 04 Apr 2013 22:33:42 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/04/soto-v-board-of-fire-and-police-commissioners-of-the-city-of-st-charles-ill.htmlThe Illinois Appellate Court reversed and remanded the lower court in Soto v. The Board of Fire and Police Commissioners of the City of St. Charles, Illinois, 2013 IL App (2d) 120677 (March 21, 2013).

The Court held that where there could be multiple bases for a Board's decision to not hire an applicant, but no findings were made, remand to issue findings is appropriate. 

The court must determine whether the Board relied on improper factors in making its employment decision, or whether its decision was against the manifest weight of the evidence, not merely identify in the record reasons that could justify the Board's decision where such findings have not been made.]]>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:18:53 GMThttp://achoatelaw.com/2/post/2013/04/northington-v-h-m-international.htmlOn March 21, 2013, the Seventh Circuit ruled in Northington v. H & M International, No. 12-1233, a Title VII case alleging that plaintiff was fired in retaliation for making a complaint that co-workers harassed plaintiff.

The Seventh Circuit held that the District Court did not err in granting employer’s motion for summary judgment.

The Seventh Circuit noted that the employee did not state at the time of the complaint that co-workers harassment of the employee was based on any protected classification.  Furthermore, the record established that the motivation for the harassment was based only on personal conflict between the plaintiff and her co-workers. As such, plaintiff failed to show that she had engaged in protected activity to support retaliation claim.]]>