Human Resources and Employment

Gould & Ratner’s Human Resources and Employment Law Practice advises company management on a broad array of employment matters and state and federal labor laws. We focus our practice on three core disciplines:

Employment and benefits counseling
Employee training
Employment litigation

Our lawyers firmly believe that an “ounce of prevention” is worth far more than the proverbial “pound of cure.” Nearly every issue arising in the human resources arena is best addressed proactively, long before anyone can even contemplate filing a lawsuit or administrative charge.

To that end, our lawyers are not just hired guns representing employers in court, but are a valued and necessary part of the entire human resources life-cycle from:

Interviewing
Hiring
Compensating
Packaging benefits
Coaching
Disciplining
Separating from employment

In addition, our lawyers regularly provide advice in areas including, but not limited to:

Planned discharge decisions, including assessing risk and compliance with EEO law
Impact of labor and employment law issues on mergers and acquisitions
Legal compliance audits of human resources practices
Layoffs and reductions in force
Leave issues under the Family and Medical Leave Act, workers’ compensation law and the Americans with Disabilities Act
Requests for reasonable accommodation
Drafting and enforcing non-compete, non-solicitation and non-disclosure agreements
Investigating harassment complaints
Revising and updating employee handbooks
Securing I-9 compliance through internal audits
Strategies to ensure exemptions from the requirement of paying overtime

Client Counseling

The Human Resources and Employment Law Practice's lawyers have a long history of working closely with their clients’ general counsel and/or human resources professionals to proactively consult on the myriad of employment-related issues presented to companies across the country.

Our team has all the resources needed to help build a “best practices” human resources department and to minimize the risks of facing costly litigation:

Consulting on the latest human resources topics
Elevating human resources to the “C” suite
Drafting executive compensation agreements
Designing and drafting employee benefit plans

Training

In line with our goal of focusing on preventative measures that assist employers in reducing exposure to costly employment-related lawsuits, we have developed training and educational programs that can yield significant and measurable savings over costly employment actions and claims.

Our lawyers personally conceive, design and present all of the firm’s employment law training seminars. We believe that, as lawyers, we bring a unique perspective to employment-related training.

We have significant experience in court defending employers against discrimination lawsuits filed by current and former employees, so we have witnessed the successes and the failures employers face in court. The use of practicing lawyers as trainers brings both a real-world understanding and years of practical experience to each and every seminar.

Representative Training Programs

Harassment Prevention for Managers and Supervisors
Overtime Run Amok? The Basics of Wage and Hour Law
Risk Management
Supervisory Skills Training 101
Diversity and Sensitivity in a Multi-Cultural Workforce

Employment Litigation

Our attorneys represent employers in employment-based lawsuits in state and federal courts across the country and before various federal, state and local governmental agencies. We have litigated a wide variety of employment-related disputes, including:

Employment discrimination (national origin, age, disability, etc.)
Sexual harassment
Workers’ compensation retaliation
Enforcement of restrictive covenants
Breaches of fiduciary duty
Breaches of contract
Unfair labor practice charges
EEOC charges
Wage and hour

HR Blog

As part of our lawyers' commitment to stay on top of ever-changing laws and regulations pertaining to human resource and employment, we regularly post updates on hot topics in employment law on our HR Blog. To view and subscribe to it, click here.

Less

Related Practices

Litigation

Harassment Prevention Training

Our Team

Chair, Human Resources and Employment Law Practice

Representative Matters

Disability Discrimination

Sanctions Won: Our lawyers represented a coal mining company in a case in which the plaintiff, a current employee, alleged that she was being unlawfully harassed because of her age and disability and that the company was failing to accommodate her disability. Due to ongoing discovery disputes, the firm filed a motion to compel, which the court granted and in which the court ordered sanctions against the plaintiff’s counsel in an amount equal to the company’s costs in preparing that motion. The case settled shortly thereafter for a release of the company’s right to collect the sanctions.
Making Law in the Circuit: We represented a large international employer in a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by a current employee. The employee alleged that the company failed to accommodate her medical condition which required, among other things, frequent bathroom breaks. The firm was able to secure admissions at the plaintiff’s deposition that she believed her performance was far superior to the generally positive ratings she had received from her supervisors. On summary judgment, the employer successfully convinced the court that since self-assessed performance was so overwhelmingly above expectations that she was not entitled to a reasonable accommodation as a matter of law.
Moonlighting Proven: Our lawyers represented a coal mining company in a disability discrimination case filed by a current employee. After securing evidence that the employee had been moonlighting while on a claimed medical leave of absence, David Michael was successful in having the case dismissed and in defeating the employee’s request for review (appeal).

Retaliatory and Wrongful Discharge

Falsifying Medical Records: We represented an aggregate and stone mining company in a retaliatory discharge case. David Michael successfully argued to the appellate court that the plaintiff falsified medical records and failed to establish the company terminated him for any other reason than his failure to return to work after he had recovered from a workers’ compensation injury.
Admitting Speculation: Our lawyers represented a truck trailer manufacturer in a retaliatory discharge case brought by a former employee who suffered numerous work-related injuries. At the plaintiff’s deposition, David Michael was able to secure an admission that the plaintiff was simply speculating that the company terminated her employment in retaliation for filing a workers’ compensation claim. Accordingly, the court granted the company’s summary judgment motion.
Statute of Frauds: The firm represented a graduate school in child development in a wrongful discharge case. The plaintiff argued that he had been granted a two-year employment contract and was wrongfully terminated only 11 months after it began. The court granted the firm’s motion to dismiss, finding that the alleged employment contract was not in writing and, therefore, was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.

Other Matters

Defamation: In a departure from its normal position as defense counsel, our lawyers successfully represented a long-time friend of the firm in an arbitration case alleging defamation against his prior employer associated with its filing of a false Form U-5. After winning $333,000 in the arbitration, David Michael successfully defended that judgment from attack at the trial court, before the appellate court and in front of the Supreme Court.
DOL Action: The firm represented a “turn-around” specialist after several high-ranking former employees sued for compensation and benefits under their employment agreements. David Michael successfully convinced the Department of Labor to dismiss the case.
Discrimination: We represented an airline in a race discrimination, workers’ compensation and retaliatory discharge case involving an employee who was terminated for excessive absenteeism. In this case, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the airline.

We represented a tool manufacturer in an age discrimination/discharge case. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the company, finding that the plaintiff was unable to produce evidence that the discharge was based upon his age.
Misappropriation of Trade Secrets: Paul Carroll and David Michael represented a recruiting company in an action against a former employee for misappropriation of trade secrets, breach of his employment agreement and breach of his fiduciary duty of loyalty. The matter was resolved upon entry of a permanent injunction barring the former employee from utilizing any confidential or trade secret information from his former employer.
Wage and Hour Class Claims: David Michael represented an employer in Indiana in a class action brought pursuant to the Indiana Wage Payment law. Using a procedural device under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the firm was able to resolve the case prior to the certification of class.

Publications

News

Publication Highlight

Should the Standard for Obtaining Preliminary Injunctions Under the NLRA Be Easier? The U.S. Supreme Court Weighs In...

In a 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court recently sided with Starbucks Corp. over the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in a decision that would severely delay the process for the NLRB to obtain preliminary injunctions for employees discharged during labor disputes.

Publication Highlight

Federal Judge Blocks U.S. Department of Labor’s New Overtime Rule in Texas

A federal judge in Texas granted a preliminary injunction on June 28, 2024, barring the July 1, 2024, effect of a new U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) overtime regulation that would have increased the salary threshold for automatic overtime eligibility under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Publication Highlight

The FTC vs. Noncompete Agreements: Ban on Noncompete Agreement Hits a Roadblock

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a much-debated “Final Rule” earlier this year that banned most noncompete agreement nationwide. On July 3, 2024, a federal judge in Texas issued a preliminary injunction that delays enforcement of the Final Rule against certain plaintiffs, who are seeking to block the rule permanently.

Publication Highlight

Texas Federal Court Strikes Down FTC Noncompete Rule

In the first definitive ruling on the Federal Trade Commission’s Final Rule banning most noncompete agreements, the Texas federal judge that previously granted a preliminary injunction to temporarily block the Final Rule from taking effect (see our blog post on that ruling) has now entered judgment in the plaintiffs’ favor to “hold unlawful” and “set aside” the rule nationwide under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).