In Florida, as in most other states, laws exist to protect private and public employees who “blow the whistle” on employers who engage in illegal or unethical acts. At the federal level, the Whistleblower Protection Act protects federal government employees from retaliation for reporting dishonest activities within federal agencies.

In essence, a whistleblower is an employee who reports his or her employer for engaging in an activity that is in violation of the law, and in return, the employee is punished by their employer for reporting such activity.

To claim whistleblower protection, a private employee must typically establish the following:

• The employer took retaliatory personnel action against the employee because he or she disclosed or threatened to disclose to a governmental agency, under oath and in writing, that the employer engaged in unlawful activity
• That the employee gave notice of the unlawful activity to the employer in writing
• That the employer was given a chance to correct the unlawful activity

Public employees are afforded similar protections under Florida law, with a couple of key differences: the unlawful activity need only be a suspected violation of law and the disclosure need not be under oath.

If you find yourself in a situation at work where your employer may be engaging in unlawful activity, you owe it to yourself to learn as much as you can about what rights you have as a whistleblower. Don’t let an employer put you, or the general public, in harm’s way.

What started out as a great idea for an intriguing motorcycle helmet generated $13.5 million in investment capital two years ago, but the project has ended in failure. According to recent news, the vast amount of money that was brought in to finance the creation of the helmet really went to pay for trips to exotic destinations, luxury cars and personal expenses that included limos, strip clubs and rent.

The Indiegogo Skully motorcycle helmet crowdfunding campaign, which got a lot of press on the website and generated a lot of investment capital, was supposed to finance the creation of a futuristic helmet with a heads up display and augmented reality, but that’s not where the money went.

Ultimately, the two brothers who started the company were forced into bankruptcy, but they did not mention any of the above wrongdoing in their Chapter 7 filings. Instead, that information had to wait before it was revealed by an ex-assistant who filed a lawsuit against the company, and in that lawsuit, she exposes a host of facts about what happened at the company.

The ex-assistant’s lawsuit cited failure to pay overtime and wrongful termination, in addition to other allegations. She might have as well head to The Keating Firm site or other online sources for acquiring the knowledge that would be required to help her with the lawsuit, as the proceeding of the lawsuit may be new to her. She also showed that the two brothers used the investment money they received from Indiegogo to pay for new apartments, cleaning services, groceries, restaurant meals, and personal technological items. In addition, the brothers apparently bought two Dodge Vipers, an Audi R8, four motorcycles, and trips to Las Vegas exceeding $13,000. The assistant further said that she was made to engage in fraudulent bookkeeping to defraud investors into thinking that they were using company funds to finance their business pursuits.

It is difficult to say how this ex-employee’s lawsuit will end. However, it appears that the facts and figures regarding Skully’s dishonesty could help endear the courts to the woman’s position in this matter.

Source: costaleslaw.com, “This multi-million dollar crowdfunding fail sounds like the plot for a bad movie,” Chris Smith, Aug. 11, 2016

If you suffer from serious food allergies, you know just how dangerous a stray peanut or strawberry can be. But does the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) covers food allergies?

The quick answer is yes, it does, but there are issues you should be aware of before you address the situation with your employer.

A little history

Originally, the ADA did not cover food allergies. That changed in 2008 with the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA), which significantly modified the scope of “disability” under the law. The changes now make it simpler to demonstrate to your employer how your food allergy may be considered a disability.

This is especially important because food allergies are on the rise. According to a 2013 study by the CDC, food allergies increased in children by 50 percent between 1997 and 2011. While the reason is unclear, the increase will have a major impact in the coming years as this group enters the workforce.

What the ADAAA amendments mean for you

Because some food allergies are life-threatening to certain individuals, employers must make reasonable accommodations if approached by an employee about a food allergy. Determining what is a reasonable accommodation will vary, but might include:

• Prohibiting certain foods from being brought into the office by other employees
• Providing areas where access is restricted to the foods in question
• Supplying additional lunch time to allow employees with allergies to dine at home
• Keeping meetings free from food or specific foods

Also, employers should have an emergency plan in place in case of an anaphylactic reaction. A training class for all employees to recognize the signs of such an attack and what to do if one happens is also an option.

Protection against retaliation

In addition to making a reasonable accommodation, your employer cannot retaliate against you once it learns of your food allergy. This means your employer cannot fire you once you inform them about your disability or if you request an accommodation. This falls under the anti-retaliation and discrimination sections of the ADA.

If you feel you are being discriminated against due to a food allergy, or your employer will not provide a reasonable accommodation, you should seek legal advice as soon as possible to protect your rights under the ADA.

At the Law Offices of Gary A. Costales, PA, we help Florida residents fight back after they have suffered on-the-job sexual harassment. For the most part, the sexual harassment cases we represent fall under two primary categories: 1) quid pro quo sexual harassment, and 2) hostile work environment sexual harassment.

A quid pro quo sexual harassment case involves a situation where a Florida worker’s continued benefit, employment and work advancement hinges on the worker performing sexual favors. Also, the worker may encounter penalties for failing to comply with sexual requests.

A hostile work environment case involves a worker encountering unwanted sexual advances, offensive language, offensive behavior, and insulting comments in the workplace. This type of behavior may be the result of an unhealthy workplace culture that the employer fails to put a stop to. These cases are usually stronger when an employer fosters and promotes a hostile work environment, or when an employer was aware of the toxic workplace culture and neglected to correct it.

No matter how a sexual harassment problem comes about in a Florida workplace, the issue is serious. It should be addressed immediately by the individual who is being abused and/or by any individual who is aware of the abuse.

Workers should not be afraid to bring attention to any incident of sexual harassment. Indeed, in the event that a worker is punished or retaliated against in any way for bringing sexual harassment into the light, that worker can seek legal protections and financial remedies through state and federal courts. No worker should ever have to endure this kind of abuse.

It appears that baby boomers are leaving the workforce quickly in order to retire. According to one statistic, approximately 10,000 baby boomers are retiring each day in the United States. Faced with instances of age discrimination that make it harder for baby boomers to find work, it’s clear to see why this older demographic is choosing to leave the workforce, but at what cost? Many are questioning to what degree the baby boomer exit is hurting business and productivity levels.

Retiring at the age of 65 has been standard practice since the Great Depression when the government was trying to induce job openings for the younger population, which it was believed was more productive at the time. A lot of older workers were refusing to leave their jobs at the time until President Franklin Roosevelt offered up the Social Security Act in 1935. The Social Security Act created the monthly pension that we have come to rely on today – and supplies millions of Americans with their monthly retirement checks each month. Thus began the idea that it was appropriate to quit work during the final stage of life and enjoy an easier, more leisurely life.

In the present day, employed people can also invest in other retirement plans, such as an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) and 401k to secure their future and live a leisurely life after retirement. Moreover, a regular IRA scheme can also be rolled over into a Gold IRA, in which people can invest in precious metals that might provide better interest rates and more profit in the long run. Keep in mind that a Gold IRA usually involves some fees, which can be anything from 50$ to 250$; however, the plan can have various benefits to offer to an investor.

Moreover, today’s baby boomer exit from the workplace and retire at a young age, which highly demands a stable retirement and pension plan. Older workers have institutional knowledge and a great deal of experience that they are taking with them out of the workplace. This idea appears to be substantiated by a recent study that points to a 5.5 percent decrease in per capita domestic product growth for every 10 percent increase in persons over 60 years of age in a state.

Studies show that workers who are 50 years of age offer a 60 percent high rate of productivity than workers who are 20 years of age, so why does age discrimination still persist? Partly, the reason why age discrimination persists is that we allow it to persist. Indeed, the more Florida residents who step forward and fight back against age discrimination with employment lawsuits, the more attention will be brought to this issue. In turn, lawmakers will be more likely to create legislation that offers stronger protection against age discrimination and other types of employment discrimination.

Source: jacksonville.com, “Work Wanted: Baby boomers retiring, but have a lot to offer,” Candace Moody, Aug. 24, 2016

Nearly 40 percent of Americans have entered into a noncompete agreement. Many of the people who signed their noncompetes, however, never were affected by them because they were not in a position where they needed to compete against their employer. Some individuals, on the other hand, may have faced big financial setbacks because they were unable to work in their chosen industry after leaving their former employer.

According to a new study by the United States Department of Treasury, many of the people who sign a noncompete agreement do not know the full extent of what it means. Basically, if an employee signs a noncompete, they are saying that they will not work for a rival of their previous employer if they choose to quit.

To make matters worse for employees, it seems — according to one employment law attorney — that noncompete agreements have been on the rise during the last 25 years. This is because companies have decided by and large that they need to protect the information they have shared with their employees. They do this by locking down their employees and preventing them from working for rival companies. Studies show that approximately 20 percent of Americans are currently bound by a noncompete contract.

Currently, federal law does not offer laws regarding noncompete contracts and every state has its own kind of noncompete laws. Some states, like California, for example, do not enforce noncompete clauses. That said, states like Florida are very strict with the enforcement of noncompete agreements and favor the employer over the employee.

Florida residents who have entered into a noncompete agreement may wish to discuss the matter with an employment law lawyer before they choose to change employment. A lawyer can help employees review their current legal obligations under the noncompete agreement and whether the agreement will hold up in court.

Source: PBS, “What you should know about non-compete agreements,” Duarte Geraldino, July 14, 2016