|
Hopefully a quick question... is it considered discrimination not to hire someone based on allergies? Situation: we have a cat in the workplace and are hiring new folks. We've actually had a few people in the past who were allergic but took claritin or whatever and were able to deal with it, but I'm wondering if we can even ask people if they're allergic during interviews? If we hire someone who is allergic and they cannot control it with claritin, do we have to get rid of our cat?  Hopefully the people we interview just won't be allergic. But I am curious about how this works. It's not like we're hiring someone for a peanut eating job and they're allergic to peanuts... the cats are not a necessary part of the job, but we don't want to lose our little furry friends. E: we're in DC, but I imagine this would fall under the ADA which is federal, yeah?
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 18:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
entris posted:How big is your organization? Small, 4-6 people.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 18:40
|
|
|
Ah, good to know! If we were over 15 would it be any different?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 18:59
|
|
|
I have a parking ticket question too! So I got one in DC the other day b/c my Virginia safety inspection sticker had expired – a understandable, but lame reason to get a $50 ticket. However, the officer who write the ticket made a mistake – they wrote down my tag year as 2011 when it's really 2013. I'm guessing that they just wrote down the same year as the safety inspection sticker by mistake. Is this grounds enough for dismissal? I can deny the ticket online without having to go into court, so it's not like I have to spend a lot of time disputing the thing... so it may actually be worth the ten minutes it'd take me to do so. Washington DC is the location.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2011 14:10
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:Can DC even enforce a Virginia inspection sticker issue (assuming this is the safety inspection yellow sticker on the windshield)? Yeah that's the sticker – and I have no idea and have always wondered. If I remember correctly DC / VA and MD have certain deals they make with each other from a law enforcement perspective since they have a lot of overlap... but I've always kinda wondered about that myself. They ticketed one of my coworkers a few months ago for not having their VA emissions sticker up to date and he just paid it. Guess I'll try disputing it! Can't hurt I suppose. kedo fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Sep 16, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2011 16:36
|
|
|
I have a question regarding late fees. Location: Geographically DC, incorporated in VA, doing business all over the place. I do a lot of freelance graphic design work and unfortunately a lot of clients are very slow to pay. I have a set of boilerplate terms that I make every client sign, and that I've been using for ages. In those terms is a line item stating that I charge an additional 5% for past due invoices. The number comes from the boilerplate – I didn't put it in there. My question is this: Is there any sort of legal limit for late fees? Can I charge more than 5%? Googling just turns up a whole lot of people talking about late fees for renters, which seems like it's probably covered by different laws. My main goal is to try to get people to pay on time, but 5% is practically nothing. On big invoices ($5,000+) it's just a drop in the bucket, and on small invoices (sub $1,000) it's laughably small, so the end result is that it has zero impact.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
Anyone familiar with copyright law / fair use provisions / derivative works as it applies to visual images? I'm in DC if that matters (pretty sure it doesn't vary state to state). Situation: a photo I took years ago is (possibly) going to be used as a background image in a advertisement, however the designer cropped in on a portion of the image and blurred it a bit. It's displaying roughly 30% of the original image, and the blurring is enough to obscure detail, but the content of the image is still obvious. I have no plans to do anything about it at the moment as I don't mind this particular person using it, but I'd like to understand the laws a bit better in case I ever run into this problem in the future. So I guess how much change is required for something to be considered a derivative work, and if something is considered a derivative work, what impact does that have on my ability to stop the person from using the image?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
Bro Enlai posted:words of wisdom Thanks much, that's a great explanation. Much appreciated!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
Alright, perhaps an odd question but... is it legal for me to use a false identity online? I ask because I am sick and tired of companies treating my personal information carelessly. You're all savvy online-folk so I'm sure none of this is news to you, but over the past couple of years several companies that have a lot of information on me have been hacked and user info has been downloaded (most notably the Sony hack, most recently the War Z hack [but really I should have known better with them]]). I've come to the conclusion that companies simply cannot be trusted to safeguard this data. So I'm wondering if it is legal to create and use a false identity for creating accounts / making purchases / etc. When I floated this idea to some friends a couple mentioned that if I were making purchases and agreeing to EULAs under a false identity it could potentially be considered fraud... is this true? State is VA, however I'm unsure whether or not that matters! e: Also apologies if this has been asked and answered before... I feel like I can't be the first person to think this might be a good idea. e2: I wonder if this is my answer... http://www.fastcompany.com/1101601/criminalizing-false-identities-end-online-anonymity quote:MySpace's terms of service require users to be "truthful and accurate" when registering. Drew's fake profile was interpreted as unauthorized access by prosecutors - a violation of the 1986 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986. kedo fucked around with this message at 14:52 on Apr 2, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
Belated thanks to joat mon and the milk machine for answers!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 14:19
|
|
|
I just received a cease and desist from U-Haul in regards to a website I am in no way even remotely associated with. Apparently this website has some Google adwords campaigns that use /u+haul/ in the URL, and U-Haul thinks they're "my client." I have zero clue how or why they decided that. Can I just email them back and say, "You got the wrong person, buddy" or would it be better to talk to my lawyer first? e: At first I thought it was some a scam or something, but after reviewing the email headers it did indeed originate from uhaul.com. So I guess it's legit. e2: District of Columbia, if that matters. kedo fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Jun 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Devor posted:You should just delete that email, it's hearsay. the littlest prince posted:You're over-thinking this; you don't need a lawyer to answer this question. Tell them they are not your client, wish them luck in their pursuits, and move on. Thanks! I kind of figured I was perhaps a little more worried about it than I should be, but letters from lawyers for big companies make me nervous. Much appreciated.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:I would ask them how they associated you with the web site. There must have been some bread crumb that they followed. It would be good to know what it is. They'll probably refuse to tell you. Also excellent advice, and again, much appreciated.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
Location: DC Situation: My coworker is a South Korean national working in the US. He's on a student visa with an Employment Authorization Document, however it expires this Saturday. He's working on getting a new visa (an O-1 if that matters at all [he is a badass]), but it's been held up due to his lawyer sucking and being really slow. So our company is basically going to have to fire him (temporarily, hopefully) tomorrow until things get sorted out. However his lawyer told him that some people in a similar situation will work for free while their visa is being processed and then get reimbursed after their visa goes through. I don't know He really wants to keep working and we all feel like poo poo for having to fire him. We're getting in touch with our own lawyers to see if this is kosher, but I'm hoping some helpful lawgoon can clue me in as to whether or not his lawyer is giving him terrible advice?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Edit: try these guys Thanks much!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:I am not an immigration lawyer, but I do work in an immigration firm and have for several years. Your company should probably be consulting not just with an immigration lawyer, but also with an employment lawyer - just because a lawyer handles work visas it does not mean they completely understand labor laws. First off thanks for the great reply! My boss is getting in touch with his law firm (who I think has both immigration folks and employment folks... they're pretty big) so hopefully they'll be able to give us some really specific advice. Ashcans posted:What the attorney is telling you is very shady and absolutely not something we would ever suggest to a client. If your colleague continues to come to your office and do the same thing that he was doing last week, then he is working for you - the fact that you aren't paying him doesn't change that, it just means your company would probably be breaking even more laws (because you are usually required to pay people who work for you on a specific timetable). Yeah, this is what I figured.  Everything about it sounded weird to me, and it seemed like it could not only hurt the business but also my coworker's chance to get his visa if someone found out about it. So unless our lawyers come back and say, "Oh yeah that's cool you should do that," I'll probably suggest we avoid it.I wonder if this is shady enough to recommend my coworker get a new lawyer... I know he's already paid this one like $7000 or something. He's trying to get his green card at the same time, which I think has some impact on the cost. Ashcans posted:An O-1 is almost always a petition filed by a US employer for someone else - is your company actually sponsoring this petition? Are they providing letters/signatures/etc. for this? If so, then this lawyer is not just 'his' lawyer, he is also representing your company in this matter. Your HR should be able to contact him and ask him to verify what exactly your colleague can do and how they are allowed to compensate him. If he isn't being shady there is no reason he wouldn't provide that answer to them in writing. He was already in the process before he started working with us, so no, we're not sponsoring him and are not involved with his lawyer in any way. He has a bunch of former employers / colleagues providing the necessary letters. We should definitely get in touch with his lawyer (I think our HR person may have), but the fact that he's making shady recommendations concerns me. Also if he's not our lawyer, he's not really going to be out for our best interest, right? Ashcans posted:What is the actual status of the O-1? Is it submitted? Sadly no. The lawyer waited until the last minute to submit it and then called my coworker up the day of saying, "the letters these people wrote for you are not specific enough – they need to add blah blah, etc. etc." Two of the people who wrote letters are in South Korea and one is American but on vacation, so that's what's holding up the whole process, and that's what I mean when I said his lawyer sucks. Dude just basically cost my buddy his job, albeit temporarily, because he didn't have his poo poo together in time.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Comcast is usually pretty reasonable. I don't think you and I have dealt with the same company. But still, Raptures, you should somehow get the boxes back to them... if they're already trying to charge you for 'em, things will only get worse. A friend of mine accidentally hung onto an old modem after he moved, and about six months later he was sent to collections for not paying late return fees (which he never knew about). It's seriously not worth the trouble to try to stick it to them, as they have way more resources at their disposal to stick it to you.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
Angry Hippo posted:I hate you all. I wish you were bagels. Saw this probate coming from a mile away.  Excellent work all around lawgoons, A+++ would read again.To follow up on my posts from a few pages ago, we finally got some good responses from an immigration lawyer and our normal employment lawyer in regards to my coworker's situation, and their feedback was this (more or less a copy/paste of what my boss wrote down while talking to them): quote:- Once [coworker]'s EAD expires we cannot employ [coworker]. This is pretty much the exact opposite of what his lawyer told him which is really worrying to me. From what I can tell with admittedly zero understanding of these laws, his lawyer is basically encouraging him to do illegal things that could completely gently caress my coworker / the business. My question is this: coworker is already out $7000 and a few months of work with this lawyer. Should he stick with him and hope things work out, or should he try to get together whatever paperwork he can and get a new lawyer who isn't so shady? I don't know how hard to push him to find better representation and I know he'd have a tough time spending a whole bunch more money. kedo fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Jul 19, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2013 14:41
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Try not to stick your nose in his attorney-client relationship, but if he is getting bad advice, there's nothing to stop him from just talking to a different lawyer. I should mention that he has specifically asked us for advice. He is pretty clueless about the American legal system. When his lawyer missed the first deadline we said, "have you considered getting a new one?" His response: "I can?"  I'm asking here because I personally have not dealt much with lawyers directly and I'm unsure how normal it is for one to suggest skirting the law. I don't know if this is just a ho hum type of thing or a Big loving Deal. Also I realize you lawgoons may not like the idea of someone like me nosing around in a lawyer's business, but I'm concerned for my buddy. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2013 22:48
|
|
|
Thanks for the feedback! It's much appreciated.Ashcans posted:Where did your colleague even find this guy? The internet. He found the dude on some official website that listed immigration attorneys, but who knows if it was actually "official" or not. Thanks again goons!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
SlayVus posted:I was fired from my job before my current one, for a reason that kind of makes me un-hireable. I currently work in my family's business, but business is extremely bad and I think in about 4-8 weeks we will go under. Doesn't really sound like a legal question...? That is unless you want to sue your former employer for wrongful termination or something. Depending on why exactly you were fired you could potentially address the issue with the GM and find a way to explain it that doesn't make you look terrible. Or just don't include that job on your resume. \/ \/ You are so right. So what happened with these security cameras, SlayVus? 
kedo fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Jul 25, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
Toriori posted:wisdom teeth IANAL and this isn't even legal advice (not a doctor either!), but waking up during wisdom tooth extraction isn't uncommon at all. In fact "conscious sedation" means exactly what it sounds like – it's very likely you'll remain awake, hence the word "conscious" in its name. I don't know all the specifics of what went down with you of course, but it sounds like your orthodontist is just an rear end in a top hat and you have some issues with medical procedures. My sister had a very similar experience when she had her wisdom teeth out actually, but she had a very good orthodontist who told her beforehand, "You might wake up, if you do please try your best to remain calm so we can finish the procedure, it's harder to go back in a second time, if you have pain signal to us, etc etc." When she woke up she was expecting it and they did everything they could to make her more comfortable, though she still had some pain. I woke up when I was having mine out as well but couldn't feel anything so it was just weird more than anything. So look into a malpractice attorney if you like, but the waking up part (at least) is not out of the ordinary. You may just want to find a new orthodontist, because that one sounds like a dick. Sorry you had such a bad experience. e: And if the anxiety continues, you might want to talk to someone about it. That's a problem you shouldn't ignore. kedo fucked around with this message at 14:40 on Aug 9, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
Based on an extremely scientific study (read: the last four posts) I have determined dentists are chronically under-administering novacaine. Please tell me there is some legal loophole so that I may sue all dentists at once.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Purely hypothetical, maybe fun question for your lawgoons. I was having a conversation with some friends over the weekend about the restoration of voting rights for non-violent felons that's been going on in Virginia recently. At one point in our conversation someone said, "Yeah, but you've got to know when you're about to commit a felony, these people knew the risks so they shouldn't get their voting rights back!" to which someone replied, "No way, you can probably commit a felony without knowing it." So my question is this: what are some of the "easiest" felonies to commit, and are there actually felonies people can commit without knowing it? Does such a thing even exist? I think I remember certain types of traffic violations being felonies, but they're not the sort of thing that you'd be like, "oops I didn't realize that was a crime" (eg. hit and runs, vehicular homicide, etc). State is VA I suppose, but I'm just curious in general.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2013 14:32
|
|
|
So many felonies! Thanks for all the answers. Thankfully I think I've avoided most of these except for the National Park one... 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Old Man Pants posted:Most definitely. I have accounts I work with every day worth 6 figures. IANAL, but if your company is pretty big you might try asking people who work on another team/for another manager if this is standard practice. It could just be your manager being a jerk and trying to make himself look good, or it could be that you work for a company of assholes with a terrible corporate culture that promotes screwing over its employees. If it's the former, going to HR is probably the right step. If it's the latter you might want to start looking for a new job.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
dennyk posted:This. No matter what they might say, HR is not there for you, they are there for the company. Doesn't mean there aren't times when you should go to them about something, but always be aware that they are not on your side, they're on the side of saving money and avoiding liability for the company. Occasionally, those two sides might be the same, but if they're not, don't be surprised when you get the short end of the stick. I wondered if maybe the manager might be doing things which the company might not be aware/approve of, which is why I suggested OP ask people on another team to see if this is the status quo. If so, bad company, sever. If not, bad manager, probably something the business would want to know about and might even look kindly on? But you just gave me a real cloudy outlook on HR in general. I know it's true, but it bums me out.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
New Leaf posted:I feel like I DID pay it. I at least paid my co-pay at the time of the visit, she confirmed that. From what she said, this was some sort of insurance claim but she wouldn't elaborate, but the bill is coming from the doctor's office- not the insurance company. I'm not even with the same insurance company anymore- haven't been for over two years. I never saw this charge before today, and frankly I'm not convinced it existed before they spat out this piece of paper. Why wouldn't this have come up for three and a half goddamn years? I know insurance moves at a snail's pace, but they work faster than this! Judging by the way you're describing it, this sort of bill is pretty common. I don't know all the technical jargon for this crap, but basically after your visit the doctor's office bills the insurance company who says, "Okay we'll pay for X" and then you're responsible for whatever's left over. You should have received a statement of benefits from your insurance company when they paid X as well... if you keep records you might be able to find it somewhere to see if the numbers match up. Even if you aren't with the same insurance company, you should still be able to give them a call to figure out if the bill is legitimate or not. That is a pretty long time to not receive a bill, but if you went to this doctor it's likely it's real.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
IA also NAL but this page seems like it might help you. Garnishing earnings could work? Also this pdf in particular sounds like fun if it applies to your case because you get to get the sheriff involved which seems like a bad time for the dude.  In the course of googling this I learned in CA you can get the sheriff to walk into the person's place of business and take money out of the drat register which is awesome/terrifying.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Betazoid posted:Nobody going to touch this one? I would love to get this resolved. IANAL though I am a web designer and have seen/help write a bunch of contracts in the past. Unless he comes back into the country and you feel like taking him to court, you're not going to see that money again. He's probably in breach of his own terms depending on how the contract was written so you could probably make a case in small claims. What's more, often if you make a small claims filing and the other party doesn't show up (which this guy surely won't), the judge will rule in your favor by default. However then you have to go about collecting, and how are you going to do that with him in China? He might have assets in the US, but who knows. Your best bet is to write this off and never work with him again. Don't try to get help finding a job from him because he's obviously a skeevy dude. This all comes from my past experiences with overseas freelancers. I will never use a freelancer that's not in the US again.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Horse Cock Johnson posted:My girlfriend's workplace offers the ability to get a standing desk with a prescription. They give these same standing desks to managers by default. She has been having some back problems lately and her physical therapist wrote her a prescription for a standing desk. Upon presenting said prescription to her employer, they came back and requested that the doctor fill out a rather lengthy form explaining exactly why he wrote this prescription. This doesn't seem reasonable to me and I'm wondering if they have any grounds to do this. Not only does this seem to me like second guessing a medical professional's diagnosis, they're implicitly requiring that she disclose this portion of her medical records/history before they'll even consider providing the prescribed desk. Pretty sure a standing desk isn't a right, or that failing to provide one is some OSHA violation or whatever. Sounds like her employer is just trying make sure there's justification for the expense and sort of being dicks about it. IANAL and all that, but this sounds silly. What does the form actually ask? e: By the way, two seconds of googling: http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/inquiries_medical.cfm quote:Once a person is hired and has started work, an employer generally can only ask medical questions or require a medical exam if the employer needs medical documentation to support an employee’s request for an accommodation or if the employer has reason to believe an employee would not be able to perform a job successfully or safely because of a medical condition.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Legal stuff aside, college kids in CO are notorious for givin' no fucks when it comes to smoking pot. (might want to turn your volume down) e: Sorry, sort of a digression but it seemed apropos. 
kedo fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Jan 24, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
rivid posted:If one roommate is ok with him being there, I don't know if that complicates things. Would it just be best to call the non-emergency police number? I'm worried about removing him physically, because I live in Massachusetts, and I'm certain that in altercations you're only allowed to use force as a last resort. IANAL but removing him physically is probably not the best idea. Depending on your state's law you can't necessarily use force on a person even if they're in your home unless you fear for your physical safety. If your roommate isn't around and you've asked him to leave and he's still there, he's trespassing. Call the cops (yeah, probably the non-emergency number) and tell him you're calling the cops. If the roommate is there and has invited him in, I think you're out of luck.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 22:02
|
|
|
Stop working and tell her she needs to support you. Turn those tables on her, that'll make her head spin! But seriously hire a lawyer and get a divorce. Also go repost this in E/N.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
Everyone knows about it but not in the way he's using it, duh! It's like my toilet paper roll spyglass. People think they're just for toilet paper, but really they're an incredibly valuable and useful nautical device. This is my patented invention btw, plz step off.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
Hypothetical renter question in Virginia – can a landlord limit the number of times per year you can have a visitor spend the night? If the lease were to say a visitor could only spend the night a maximum of 5 nights per year, would this be enforceable? e: Googling lead me to this, which is why I ask. I get it if the visitor is basically living with the person, but 5 days seems sort of ridiculous? http://rcyounglaw.com/2011/03/23/can-a-residential-landlord-bar-the-guests-of-the-tenant-from-entering-the-premises/ posted:A further example would be when the tenant has guests which stay an amount of time which is beyond what is allowed in the lease. If this person is not on the lease, the landlord could bar the guest from returning to the property. This is also a clear violation of the lease, which would allow the landlord to begin steps necessary for evicting the tenant. kedo fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Mar 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Cool, thanks much!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Point being local connections can at times trump the legally correct outcome. Wow. That's incredibly depressing. How often does this sort of thing happen?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:We call it "getting welled." For some reason when there's a charming Texan drawl involved I have no problem with it. Still, very interesting though. Thanks for the explanations!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
If a person were to have hypothetically signed a sub-contractor agreement several years ago with a non-compete clause, and then an employee agreement only a couple of years ago without a non-compete clause, would the original non-compete be voided? This hypothetical person is no longer a sub-contractor and hasn't been for longer than the non-compete lasted anyways. \/\/ That's basically what I was asking, just in verbose and awkward manner. kedo fucked around with this message at 15:51 on May 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2014 15:46
|
|