GFFD in Employment Contracts Comes to Wisconsin?

Wisconsin For those unfamiliar with employment law, it might surprise you to learn that in the United States most states do not recognize an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (GFFD) in employment contracts, even though such covenants are deemed to exist in commercial contracts under the UCC.

By my last count, only nine states have adopted GFFD in employment contracts. Though the type of GFFD implied in employment contracts varies, the most common form involves a situation where an employee’s justified expectations to pay or benefits are frustrated by an arbitrary employer action (like an out-of-the-blue firing).

Well, Wisconsin might be the tenth state to recognize such a GFFD in employment in the case of Phillips v. US Bank (Wisconsin Ct App 02/02/2010), though the Wisconsin Appellate Court was careful not to call it that.

Continue ReadingGFFD in Employment Contracts Comes to Wisconsin?

Garcetti, Academic Freedom, and Public School Teacher’s Right to Free Speech

Scales-red In Weintraub v. Board of Education of the City of New York, No. 07-2376 (2d Cir. Jan. 27, 2010), the Second Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, has delivered a body blow to the First Amendment speech rights of public school teachers.

The case concerns a fifth-grade teacher who was dealing with a disruptive student throwing books at him on multiple occasions. When the school administrator refused to take disciplinary action against the student, the teacher filed a grievance with his union.  The school allegedly responded by retaliating against the teacher and eventually, firing him.  (BTW, all of this happened from 1998-2000, and the Second Circuit decision just came out in 2010; something about justice delayed is justice denied keeps popping into my head.)

The majority decision, written by Judge Walker, recites the holding of Garcetti (U.S. 2006) (the bane of my existence) that public employee speech pursuant to an employee’s official duties receives NO First Amendment protection. In Weintraub, the “speech” being examined was the grievance filed by the teacher with his union.

The Court held that the employee’s grievance was “pursuant to” his official duties because “it was ‘part and parcel of his concerns’ about his ability to ‘properly execute his duties,’ as a public school teacher — namely to maintain classroom discipline, which is an indispensable prerequisite to effective teaching and classroom learning.” 

Continue ReadingGarcetti, Academic Freedom, and Public School Teacher’s Right to Free Speech

English-Only Rule Comes to a Yale-Area Bookstore

Books From the New York Times:

A popular bookstore and cafe near Yale University wants its many Hispanic employees to speak only English around customers, sparking controversy in immigrant-friendly New Haven, where students fight for immigrant rights.

Atticus Bookstore and Cafe recently issued a policy stating that English should be the only language spoken on the floor and behind the counter. ”Spanish is allowed in the prep area, the dishwasher area and the lower level. Let’s make our customers feel welcome and comfortable,” the policy states, according to New Haven Workers Association, a group of activists who said employees gave them a copy.

”I’m really appalled,” said Tim Stewart-Winter, a Yale lecturer. ”As a New Haven resident and member of the Yale community, I think diversity is a strength of this country.”
Stewart-Winter said he likes to take out-of-town guests to Atticus, but may not now because of the policy.

As we have pointed out before, the EEOC generally frowns on English-only rules enforced at all times.  However, when English is only required at certain times (e.g., when talking to customers), the EEOC permits such policies if required by a business necessity (“An employer may have a rule requiring that employees speak only in English at certain times where the employer can show that the rule is justified by business necessity.”). 

Continue ReadingEnglish-Only Rule Comes to a Yale-Area Bookstore