Is a prospective employee required to give their Facebook password at a job interview? Clearly an invasion of privacy? Well, believe it or not, there is no law about any of this. Last week, members of the U.S. Senate, asked for an investigation, but the truth is, the matter had never been addressed. Employers are always coming up with new and creative ways to fire employees, and now they have a new method to use in the hiring process. Will Congress or state legislatures stop them? I sure hope so! I noticed that one senator asked the EEOC to look into the matter. However, the EEOC investigates complaints of discrimination based on age, race, sex, etc., but certainly no issues involving privacy. I guess the senator was looking for some avenue, and the EEOC is about the only avenue for wronged employees. Unfortunately, the EEOC would have to make quite a stretch to link a Facebook password with unlawful discrimination against a particular group. It will be interesting to watch how this new area of employment law develops. No doubt, soon enough, I'll have clients coming in with these issues. photo from: Forbes.com __________________________________________________________________________________________________ About the author: Bruce Coane is an attorney who specializes in labor and employment law, and, immigration law, with offices in Florida and Texas. He may be reached at [email protected], 713-850-0066 or 305-538-6800.
Today, we have oral argument before 3 judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans, on a race discrimination case. This is one court below the U.S. Supreme Court. The case is called Linda Criner vs. Texas New Mexico Power (TNMP) Company. We represent Linda Criner, an employee of TNMP, who stated in her lawsuit that she was being discriminated against because of her race. Ms. Criner is black and the evidence showed that most of her co-workers are white. Further, she alleged that she was constantly turned down for promotions within the company because of her race. Her filings with the court talked about a "good ole boy" network within the company where almost all promotions she applied for, go to white men. Despite the large amount of evidence filed with the U.S. District Court in Houston, the judge refused to allow Ms. Criner to have a jury trial. Instead, the judge dismissed the case completely, on the company's motion for summary judgment. While such motions are common, many judges still allow the case to go to trial, in order to let the jury decide. In this case, Ms. Criner never had her day in court. An appeal was filed, and, in an unusual move, the U.S. Court of Appeals, granted oral argument. This is unusual because many times the court of appeals will simply read the lawyers' briefs and make a decision without hearing oral argument. The case will be argued by Lauren Schlossberg of our Miami office, at the court of appeals today. Typically it takes 30-90 days to receive a decision. Ms. Criner, the alleged victim of the race discrimination plans to attend the oral argument in New Orleans, as well. __________________________________________________________________________________________________ About the author: Bruce Coane is an attorney who specializes in labor and employment law, and, immigration law, with offices in Florida and Texas. He may be reached at [email protected], 713-850-0066 or 305-538-6800.
Attorney Bruce Coane speaks about Mandatory Detention for Lawful U.S. Residents. For more information, please contact Coane and Associates, PLLC either at our Houston office at (713) 850-0066, or our Miami office at (305) 538-6800. You can also visit www.coane.com, or send emails to [email protected]