Blog Archives | Page 3 of 17

February 15, 2023

This past September the Securities and Exchange Commission announced charges against 15 broker-dealers and one affiliated investment adviser for widespread and long-term failures by the firms and their employees to maintain and preserve electronic communications. The firms and their employees used a messaging application on their cell phones called WhatsApp. WhatsApp has become a popular messaging application among brokers and dealers because it allows users to send messages that disappear. When the user enables “disappearing messages,” messages can be set to disappear automatically in 24 hours, 7 days, or 90 days.

The problem is this—disappearing messages violate FINRA rules 4511 and 2010 (governing standards of commercial honor and principles of trade). FINRA Rule 4511 requires that FINRA members make and preserve books and records for a period of at least six years, and do so in a form and media that comply with Securities Exchange Act (SEA) Rule 17a-4. The rules apply to all electronic communications such as email, instant messages, collaboration tools, text messages, social media, and messaging platforms like WhatsApp messenger. Further, FINRA clarified in Regulatory Notice 17-18 that financial firms must retain records of communications related to its business that are made through text messaging apps and chat services such as “WhatsApp.” The notice states “…every firm that intends to communicate or permit its associated persons to communicate, with regard to its business through a text messaging app or chat service, must first ensure that it can retain records of those communications as required by SEA Rules 17a-3 and 17a-4 and FINRA Rule 4511. SEC and FINRA rules require that, for record retention purposes, the content of the communication determines what must be retained.”

With increasing numbers of financial sector employees using WhatsApp in non-compliant ways, regulators such the SEC, CFTC and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) have been imposing stringent fines on violators.

The firms recently charged by the SEC admitted the facts in their respective SEC orders, acknowledged that their conduct violated recordkeeping provisions of the federal securities laws, agreed to pay combined penalties of more than $1.1 billion, and have begun implementing improvements to their compliance policies and procedures to settle these matters.

The following eight firms (and five affiliates) have agreed to pay penalties of $125 million each:
- Barclays Capital Inc.
- BofA Securities Inc. together with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc.
- Citigroup Global Markets Inc.
- Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
- Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. together with DWS Distributors Inc. and DWS Investment Management Americas, Inc.
- Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC
- Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC together with Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC
- UBS Securities LLC together with UBS Financial Services Inc.
The following two firms have agreed to pay penalties of $50 million each:
- Jefferies LLC
- Nomura Securities International, Inc.
- Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. has agreed to pay a $10 million penalty.

According to a SEC press release: “Finance, ultimately, depends on trust. By failing to honor their recordkeeping and books-and-records obligations, the market participants we have charged today have failed to maintain that trust,” said SEC Chair Gary Gensler. “Since the 1930s, such recordkeeping has been vital to preserve market integrity. As technology changes, it’s even more important that registrants appropriately conduct their communications about business matters within only official channels, and they must maintain and preserve those communications. As part of our examinations and enforcement work, we will continue to ensure compliance with these laws.”

In addition to the significant financial penalties, each of the firms was ordered to cease and desist from future violations of the relevant recordkeeping provisions and was censured.

If you or someone you know works in the securities, commodities and financial industries and uses ephemeral communications and messaging apps like WhatsApp, Snapchat, Signal and Telegram to conduct business transactions, you may have rights under the SEC Whistleblower Program to qualify for a reward if you present information to the SEC that results in a recovery of a fine or penalty against your employer.

Halunen Law can help you file a whistleblower complaint with the agency. Our attorneys have years of experience representing whistleblowers from most every industry. We can provide guidance to you—including making internal reports to your employer—in order to protect your legal interests and provide protection from retaliation. Contact our office today.

February 14, 2023

hostile-work-environment-lawyer-halunen-law A headline story in the New York Times recently read “When Having a Baby and Losing Your Job Collide.” The article discussed the recent phenomenon of large corporations, predominantly but not exclusively in the tech and media industries, offering lavish benefits and perks to attract quality workers in a tight labor market. Escalating competition for talent required companies provide more and offer more with each passing quarter.

Those days are apparently over. With massive layoffs by some of the country’s top tech firms including Microsoft and Alphabet (Google’s corporate parent), affected workers are experiencing whiplash after receiving a pink slip they never expected. According to the article, large numbers of these laid off workers, men and women alike, had recently experienced the birth of a child, a time normally filled with hope and joy, and were taking advantage of voluntarily enacted paid parental leave policies. Employers adopted such generous benefits not out of the goodness of their hearts, but out of greed. We know this retrospectively because these same companies appear to be targeting employees who availed themselves of paid parenting leave when implementing their layoffs. Sorry to break the news, employees were used.

State Laws:

To be clear – it is not unlawful for an employer to lay off an employee who happens to be on parental leave when a company-wide layoff occurs. However, an employer may not terminate an employee as part of a layoff because he or she is on maternity or paternity leave. As an example, your employer may think it’s weak for a male employee to take paternity leave to help his spouse for a few months, and therefore uses a layoff to get rid of that employee. Many states make it illegal to terminate an employee because they’ve taken maternity or paternity leave, as bonding between a newborn and a parent is a benefit to society and should be encouraged. In these states, an employee discharged for taking time off can bring an action for damages against their employer. By inducing an employee to sign a severance agreement containing a release of claims for a minimal amount, the employer gets litigation insurance on the cheap – saving it potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages that a judge or jury might otherwise assess in a meritorious legal action. With this leverage in hand, of course employees should negotiate with their employers to get a better deal. Check these links out for additional information:

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/79th2017/ExhibitDocument/OpenExhibitDocument?exhibitId=29512&fileDownloadName=0330ab266_ParentalLeaveReportMay05.pdf

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-state-of-paid-family-and-medical-leave-in-the-u-s-in-2023/

Federal laws:

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) makes it illegal for employers to fire, refuse to hire, or deny a woman a promotion because she is pregnant. The law also provides that an employer must treat a pregnant woman the same way it would treat any other employee who becomes sick or temporarily disabled. If the employer provides benefits such as paid sick days or disability, it must cover pregnancy related disability and recovery from childbirth. The PDA does not guarantee job protection; it only guarantees a pregnant employee’s right to be treated the same as any other employee with a medical condition.

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) provides for job-protected, unpaid leave of up to twelve weeks after the birth or adoption of a child. Upon return from FMLA leave, the employee must be restored to the same or a substantially equivalent position. It prohibits any form of interference with or retaliation from use of necessary leave. In order to qualify under the FMLA, you must have been employed by your employer for over one year and have worked for at least 1250 hours over the course of that previous year. The FMLA only covers employees at companies with 50 or more workers.

So, now what? You believed your employer when it promised you an elaborate array of amazing benefits and you accepted its job offer. Then, months or years later, you take the time off promised (and encouraged), only to be followed up a termination because the company decided to “restructure” or “eliminate” or “right-size.” Note: these terms are often code language for “let’s get rid of people we don’t want around anymore.” Typically your employer will offer you some minimal severance, like a few weeks to a few months of base pay. To repeat, they’re only doing this to buy a release from you so you can’t sue. Know your rights. As the expression goes, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”

So, if you are in this situation, it is wise to consult with an attorney before accepting any severance. You may have leverage that will allow you to respectfully decline the relative peanuts being offered and demand more. People typically think that the severance offers are non-negotiable. Nothing could be further from the truth. Your employer should not get the last word on how you depart company.

If you feel you’ve experienced illegal action in your workplace, we encourage you to submit a Case Review Form to our firm. One of our attorneys will review your information, and you’ll receive a response from our firm in a timely manner. There is no charge for this confidential process. And, if we take your case, as a contingency-based law firm, there is no cost unless we win.

We’re here to help you navigate your lawful rights and ensure you get the treatment you deserve. Together, we can hold employers accountable and create a fairer workplace for everyone.

December 22, 2022

Whistleblowers who call out bribery of foreign officials can reap significant rewards

Never underestimate human creativity when unchecked greed is involved. People who feel unbound by such trifles as ethics, morals, fair play – or the law – will find a way to get what they want. They’ll bend and break the rules in new and creative ways, illegally game the system through novel schemes and take advantage of the complexities of business and the law to wrongfully obtain the money, favors, benefits, information or things of value they covet. Sometimes, however, such corruption involves a more straightforward act: bribery. And bribery is one of many wrongful acts that can form the basis of a whistleblower action.

An Ancient Tradition and a Modern Scourge

Bribery is one of the oldest forms of corruption. In fact, it’s literally the textbook definition of corruption, as the Oxford Dictionary defines it as “dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.” Acts of bribery can be found in the historical records of ancient Egypt, Greece and China, among other civilizations. Today, bribery is a persistent pox on the global economy, but on a scope and scale that corrupt officials of the ancient world couldn’t conceive.

The World Bank estimates international bribery exceeds $1.5 trillion annually, or 2% of global gross domestic product. High-ranking officials around the world, including presidents and prime ministers, are regularly embroiled in headline-making bribery scandals. And here in the U.S., bribery cases involving public and elected officials, from zoning board and city council members to law enforcement agents to members of Congress, result in hundreds of prosecutions and convictions each year. Between 2017 and 2021, 987 people were convicted of federal bribery charges, according to the U.S.
Sentencing Commission.

Laws Reward and Protect Whistleblowers Who Expose Bribery and Corruption

Most bribery schemes are simple; the complexities usually involve a cover-up. A person or organization wants something from a public official that may not be obtainable by legal means – a permit, a change in the law, a favorable decision, or, as is often the case, a lucrative government contract. To get the desired outcome, the bribing party will give the official an off-the-books reward – a suitcase full of cash or laundered money, luxury cars or vacations, a promise of a “consulting” job or anything else the official desires.

Several federal and state criminal laws prohibit bribery. The primary federal bribery statute involving U.S. officials prohibits giving or accepting anything of value to or by a public official if the thing is given “with intent to influence” an official act, or if the official receives it “in return for being influenced.”

As with commerce, however, bribery doesn’t have borders in this age of globalization. For U.S. citizens and companies that do business in other countries, where public corruption is widespread, offering bribes can be the cheapest and fastest way to get the government accommodations they want for their business objectives. Federal law bans such bribes as well. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) generally prohibits the payment of bribes to foreign officials to assist in obtaining or retaining business.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Department of Justice enforce the FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions. The SEC may bring civil enforcement actions against companies and individuals that violate those provisions. Those that are found in violation of the act are subject to substantial fines as well as the forfeiture of any benefits they received because of the violation.

As noted, many acts of bribery go undetected because both parties will make great efforts to conceal their conduct. That’s one reason the SEC relies on whistleblowers to report violations of the FCPA, among other laws. Those who report bribery and other misconduct through the SEC whistleblower program are often employees of the companies involved. Employees receive protection from retaliation. If a company fires or takes other adverse employment action against a whistleblower, the employee can sue in federal court and seek double back pay (with interest), reinstatement, reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs.

Just as important, an FCPA whistleblower can receive a percentage of any amounts the government recovers as a result of the information provided. These sums can be significant. For example, in fiscal year 2021 alone, 108 whistleblowers received $564 million in awards through the SEC program. That’s an average of $5.2 million per whistleblower.

If you’re aware of or suspect bribery or other illegal conduct by your employer or individuals at your company and are ready to share what you know, the whistleblower attorneys at Halunen Law stand ready to support you. We’ve recovered millions of dollars in compensation for individuals who had the courage to do the right thing. During a free, confidential consultation, our whistleblower lawyers can answer your questions and help determine if you have grounds to pursue a claim. Contact our firm at 612-605-4098 or submit this Contact Form online.

susan m coler employment attorney A Partner at Halunen Law, Susan Coler is a member of the Halunen Law False Claims Act (FCA)/Whistleblower Practice Group. She represents whistleblowers who challenge illegal corporate conduct, particularly fraud against the government. As an MSBA Labor and Employment Law Specialist, Susan has also brought successful retaliation claims in connection with FCA/qui tam cases and as stand-alone actions

November 8, 2022

You’ve likely heard some variation of the adage, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” When we meet people who’ve experienced workplace harassment, discrimination, retaliation, or wrongful termination, many of them arrive believing the only tool that can obtain justice is the hammer of litigation. Many more victims of wrongful employment actions never contact a lawyer because they mistakenly assume that hiring one means a lawsuit is inevitable.

The reality is that wronged employees have plenty of tools other than litigation if they want to hold their employers accountable for the financial, emotional, reputational, and other damages they caused. If aversion to a lawsuit is holding you back from arranging a free consultation with one of our employment attorneys, please understand that all roads to justice don’t lead to the courthouse.

Litigation Is Rarely the First Option

Not only is litigation far from the only option for resolving an employment dispute, it is also rarely the first option. Most lawsuits aim to resolve conflicts or hold parties responsible for their wrongful actions through settlements or after trials. But most lawsuits (other than when immediate intervention is required to protect or preserve a party’s rights) proceed only after other efforts to resolve conflicts fail.

That’s because litigation – while sometimes necessary – can be lengthy, costly, and emotionally taxing. It also involves significant uncertainty, as there’s no such thing as a “slam-dunk” case, no matter how egregious the underlying conduct may have been. Significantly, litigation is a public process. What was a private dispute is now out in the open.

If all other attempts to resolve your employment dispute fail, litigation – despite its less- than-appealing qualities – may be the only way to vindicate your rights and obtain the relief, remedies, and compensation you deserve. And if you reach the courthouse steps, you will not be alone because your attorney will be in your corner all the way. But before reaching the courthouse steps, your attorney will undoubtedly explore all other options for achieving your goals.

Leverage Can Deter Litigation

These options begin with negotiations with your current or former employer. After you’ve determined your goals – getting your job back, back pay, front pay, an apology or admission of wrongdoing – your attorney can develop and implement a strategy to exert maximum leverage over the employer when negotiating the terms of a severance or settlement. And if you have potential or viable claims against your employer for discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or wrongful termination, you have plenty of leverage.

No business wants the uncertainty, disruption and potential financial or reputational damage that are byproducts of employment litigation. Employers value avoiding such unattractive consequences. If an employer worries that you may have viable claims, offering you an attractive severance package or agreeing to other settlement demands in exchange for claim waivers can be a wise investment. Similarly, your employer may want to ensure that you refrain from publicizing your allegations and compensate you for keeping them confidential.

Given these circumstances, there’s a significant chance you’ll be able to obtain the justice you seek through negotiation rather than litigation. And even if you fail to resolve your claims before you file a lawsuit, your case can settle at any time, even after a trial starts.

Meeting With a Lawyer Doesn’t Mean You’ll Become a Litigant

No matter how righteously indignant you are about the way your employer treated you and no matter how strong your claims may be, the thought of lawsuits and courtrooms, of questions from a hostile attorney about your already traumatic experience, of unwanted attention or publicity, may deter you from entertaining the thought of meeting a lawyer. But this can be a costly mistake; one that deprives you of an opportunity to obtain justice and vindication without litigation. As non-litigious as you may be, remember that meeting with a lawyer doesn’t mean that you’ll become a litigant.

November 4, 2022

A majority of states, 38 to date plus four United States territories, have enacted statutes legalizing the consumption of cannabis to treat specified medical conditions. Some of these jurisdictions provide legal protections in the workplace for medical cannabis/marijuana users. Minnesota is one. That is, individuals in Minnesota with a qualifying medical condition (which includes chronic pain, cancer, seizures and nausea) may consume cannabis purchased from an authorized dispensary if they obtain a prescription from their health care practitioner, submit a valid application to the Department of Health for inclusion on the registry and obtain a medical cannabis card. This blog discusses the scope of protections for these individuals under Minnesota’s medical cannabis statute and, relatedly, rights arising under the state’s stringent drug testing law.

Lawful Consumables

Even without a specific anti-discrimination provision, participants of the Minnesota’s medical cannabis program would be protected against termination under the state’s “lawful consumables” statute, Minn. Stat. § 181.938. This law predates the medical cannabis statute by two decades and prohibits any employer from terminating or refusing to hire an employee for “engag[ing] in the use or enjoyment of lawful consumable products,” provided the use takes place off premises and outside of working hours. Principle among lawful consumables are alcohol and tobacco. Illicit drugs, naturally, fall outside that law’s protections.

Medical Cannabis Workplace Protections

To eliminate any doubt about the legal status of medical cannabis users, the Minnesota legislature included in the THC Therapeutic Research Act (“TTRA”), Minn. Stat. § 152.21, protections applicable to employment (as well as housing and education). Specifically, “an employer may not discriminate against a person in hiring, termination, or any term or condition of employment, or otherwise penalize a person” because the person is enrolled in the program or has tested positive for cannabis following lawful use. Two notable exceptions exist:

When an employee tests positive after consuming medical cannabis during working hours or when impaired at work; and
When hiring or failing to terminate an employee on the registry would “violate federal law or regulations or cause an employer to lose a monetary or licensing-related benefit under federal law or regulations.”

Unfortunately, the latter exception has created misconceptions among employers who, as a condition of contracting with the federal government, must comply with the federal Drug Free Workplace Act (“DFWA”), 41 U.S.C. § 8102. Businesses large and small erroneously believe that DFWA compliance precludes their hiring of participants in Minnesota’s medical cannabis program because—despite a sea change in public acceptance—cannabis remains a prohibited Schedule I drug under federal law. No exception exists for products lawfully prescribed under the TTRA and other jurisdictions’ medical marijuana statutes.

In fact, the DFWA merely requires that government contractors ensure that “unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the person’s workplace.” Nowhere does it prohibit an employee’s use of cannabis, legally under state law or even illegally, off premises and outside working hours.

Plaintiffs alleging discrimination under the TTRA may recover compensatory damages, attorneys’ fees and, in egregious situations, punitive damages. The same facts may also give rise to liability under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”), Minn. Stat. § 363A.01, based on disability discrimination. Although lacking punitive damages, the MHRA allows for trebling of compensatory damages. The MHRA’s liability threshold is higher than the TTRA’s, requiring a plaintiff show an “adverse employment action” (e.g., termination, demotion, refusal to hire). Under the TTRA’s more lenient “penalization” standard, actions as minor as a written warning or transfer from an office to a cubicle may trigger liability.

Drug Testing and Medical Cannabis

Minnesota has one of the nation’s most stringent drug testing statutes, titled the Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (“DATWA”), Minn. Stat. § 181.950.

If you are subject to drug testing at work, it is important to remember that DATWA authorizes testing only pursuant to a written policy provided to employees prior to testing, which has also been posted in the workplace. Before being made to undergo a drug test, a Minnesota employee additionally must sign an acknowledgement stating that he/she has “seen” the employer’s drug testing policy.

Moreover, drug testing is allowed only under very specific conditions. They include: (1) job applicant testing following the receipt of a conditional offer of employment; (2) a reasonable suspicion of intoxication or after a work-related accident; and (3) random testing in “safety sensitive” positions. (As an important aside, DATWA does not apply to certain employees involved in interstate trucking, railway workers, pipeline workers, air traffic controllers and others subject to testing under an applicable federal drug testing statue).

Any employee who tests positive must be given the option of obtaining a confirmatory re-test at his/her expense, and cannot be terminated from employment unless first provided the option of enrolling in a treatment or counseling program. If an employee successfully completes the program, the employer must allow him/her to return to work. Finally, the employer must provide written notice of an employee’s right to explain a positive test. The medical cannabis statute specifically references DATWA for this purpose, stating that a participant may present “verification of enrollment in the patient registry as part of the employee’s explanation” for any such positive test.

The above is just a summary of DATWA’s many stringent requirements. Owing to its complexity, many employers routinely fail to comply with the statute.

If you are a medical cannabis user who has been subject to discipline following a work-related drug test and would like more information about your legal rights, don’t hesitate to contact the experienced employment lawyers at Halunen Law.

Employee rights and protections can be difficult to understand and navigate. If you believe you’ve experienced illegal activity in your workplace, you need an experienced legal team in your corner. Halunen Law employment attorneys are deeply committed to fighting for employee rights and have an impressive record of getting results for those they represent. We represent clients on a contingency basis, so there is no cost unless we win. Contact our office today for a free, confidential consultation.

November 4, 2022

What once seemed like your dream job has turned into a nightmare. Maybe you endured harassment that your employer failed to address or stop. Perhaps you were denied opportunities, mistreated, or terminated because of your race, age, religion, disability, or other legally protected status. Maybe you observed illegal conduct in your organization. Or you may have had the courage to notify your manager or government authorities about the misconduct against you or the wrongdoing you observed, and your employer responded by making your work life a living hell or firing you for standing up for what’s right.

You’re at a Turning Point. Which Way You Turn Is Up to You.

You’re understandably angry about what your company has done – or is still doing – to you, your career, and your sanity. Through no fault of your own, and because of your employer’s wrongful and possibly illegal conduct, you’re out of work or about to be. A giant curveball has been thrown into your career path; you find yourself at a sudden, unexpected, and undeserved turning point; and you ask yourself, What do I do now?

The answer to this question, which thousands of Americans ask themselves each year after suffering workplace harassment, discrimination, retaliation, or wrongful termination, depends on the answer to another question: What do you want?

Put another way, when your employer has wronged you, what in your view would make it right? What would justice mean to you?

There’s no single or right answer to either of those questions. One person in your shoes may decide to put the experience in the rearview mirror and move forward with life. Another may want to keep their job or get it back. Some folks would want to put the company “on blast” and share the misconduct with the world or send angry emails to those responsible. Others may just want an apology.

For many wronged employees, however, justice means that their employers are held accountable for their wrongful actions and the damage they’ve done. This could mean raising potential claims in the context of severance negotiations or filing civil lawsuits to vindicate their rights and obtain compensation. It may also include pursuing whistleblower lawsuits for alleged violations of the law.

Whatever You Decide, Make Sure It’s an Informed Decision

Only you can decide what to do at this critical turning point. But to make this decision, you need to fully understand your rights and your options and how different courses of action could advance your desired goals.

The best way to do that is by meeting with an experienced employment lawyer to discuss your situation. Many law firms, including Halunen Law, offer free initial consultations to victims of wrongful employment actions. Meeting with one of our lawyers won’t cost you anything. It’s equally important to understand that meeting with or hiring an attorney doesn’t mean that you’ll pursue a lawsuit against your employer. That may not be the best course of action given your situation or objectives, or you may not have a viable claim. In our next post, we’ll discuss alternatives to litigation that employees can take when their employers violate their rights or engage in other illegal conduct.

Whatever direction you take, meeting with a lawyer is the first step in moving from being a victim to being in charge.

September 13, 2022

A new study from researchers at the University of New Hampshire and the University of Nebraska has determined that men in executive leadership positions receive over $500,000 more in severance compensation than women. The study, recently published in the Journal of Business and Psychology, examines severance packages at the executive level through a series of analyses focusing on large, publicly traded American companies.

Researchers established that executive severance agreements, which can include benefits received by the employee upon termination “without cause,” can be susceptible to bias due to the opacity and subjectivity in how they are determined. Such ambiguity opens the door to preconceived notions and implicit biases linking gender to employment performance, personality traits, and expectations.

Examining the Findings

Jennifer Griffith, the Morrison Fellow of Diversity at the University of New Hampshire’s Peter T. Paul College of Business and Economics, noted that in this study researchers found that “male executives are more likely than their female counterparts to be rewarded in their severance agreements when the company’s stock value increased under their leadership.” She further stated that “for women, how well the company was doing had less impact on the value of their severance package. This shows that performance is attributed to other organizational or market factors when women lead and could make it more difficult for women in executive leadership roles to demonstrate their value to the firm.”

The study found that women executives were more likely to be undervalued, while male executives at similar ranks were more likely to be over-rewarded, regardless of company performance. Women were also found to be at a disadvantage in negotiating better severance packages and were often met with stronger opposition than men in negotiations due to preconceived notions of gender norms and beliefs. While previous studies have assessed the gender pay gap at the executive level as it relates to executive severance, this new study highlights the need for employers to take a more well-rounded assessment of compensation, and the need to pay closer attention to how the severance process can deprive certain groups of equal treatment.

Protect yourself from gender discrimination

Halunen Law’s attorneys are experts in the matters of gender discrimination in the workplace. If you are a woman in executive leadership who is being offered a severance agreement that is not in line with your contributions to the company, you want to consult with attorneys who have this expertise. Working closely with you, we develop an approach that puts you in the strongest possible position to obtain better and equitable compensation and benefits, as well as to minimize any restrictions on your post-departure professional activities and opportunities. Halunen Law will vigorously advocate for the severance you deserve. Please contact Halunen Law or call us at (612) 605-4098 for a free consultation.

Executive-level severance packages can be highly complex, with much at stake. Halunen Law’s employment attorneys have a depth of expertise and success in negotiating these sensitive cases at the highest levels. If you are a C-suite executive facing a severance package as part of your employment termination, contact our office today for a confidential consultation. We represent clients on a contingency basis, so there is no cost unless we win.

July 28, 2022

Dashboards The federal government has several whistleblower programs that encourage, protect, and reward individuals for reporting fraudulent or illegal conduct. Few such efforts have been as successful and put more money in whistleblowers’ pockets as has the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) whistleblower program.

The SEC reports that since the whistleblower program’s inception, it has awarded more than $1.1 billion to 214 people for providing information that led to successful enforcement actions involving securities fraud and other violations of the law. The SEC also reported that it made more whistleblower awards in fiscal year 2021 than in all previous years combined. Now, a rare piece of bipartisan legislation would further strengthen this program and provide more robust incentives and protections for those who report misconduct in the securities industry.

Introduced on March 31, 2022, by U.S. Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the SEC Whistleblower Reform Act of 2022 would speed up the claims process and implement new measures to prevent retaliation against whistleblowers.

What is the SEC Whistleblower Program?

Established by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, the SEC whistleblower program provides a mechanism for individuals to give the government information about alleged acts of securities fraud. While whistleblowers are often employees of the company engaging in fraudulent conduct, anyone who reports past or ongoing violations of federal securities laws or regulations can use the program.

If the information provided to the SEC results in a successful enforcement action, the whistleblower could receive a percentage of the ill-gotten gains recovered by the government. These sums can be significant. For example, in fiscal year 2021 alone, 108 whistleblowers received $564 million in awards through the SEC program. That’s an average of $5.2 million per whistleblower.

Recognizing that those courageous enough to report misconduct in the securities industry often do so at great risk to their careers and livelihoods, the SEC program prohibits retaliation to provide protection for whistleblowing employees. Victims of such retaliation can sue their employers in federal court and seek double back pay (with interest), reinstatement, reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs.

How the Bill Would Increase Protection for SEC Whistleblowers

While the SEC whistleblower program is unquestionably successful, it’s not perfect. The proposed legislation focuses on two of the program’s biggest deficiencies: the time it takes for the SEC to process and disburse whistleblower awards and loopholes that expose employees to potential retaliation before they report misconduct to the SEC.

Some whistleblowers, many of whom were terminated because of their efforts, must wait up to four years for compensation. The bill would reduce the wait time by requiring the SEC to issue an initial ruling on a claim within one year of the claim filing deadline.

Additionally, SEC whistleblowers are only protected from retaliation if they provide information to the SEC or other select officials. This means that an employee who reports malfeasance internally and is then fired has no legal remedy under the current SEC whistleblower statute. The proposed bill would extend SEC whistleblower protections to those who face retaliation for reporting misconduct to a supervisor or other person they believe has the authority to address the misconduct. The bill would also clarify that employees can’t waive their whistleblower rights through pre-dispute arbitration agreements.

Halunen Law: SEC Whistleblower Attorneys

At Halunen Law, we have the utmost respect for whistleblowers. While the fate of the SEC Whistleblower Reform Act is uncertain, our SEC whistleblower attorneys continue to fiercely protect the rights of those who report misconduct in the securities industry and fight to get them the maximum amount of compensation available for their courageous efforts. If you need assistance or have questions about pursuing an SEC whistleblower claim, please contact Halunen Law or call us at (612) 605-4098 for a free consultation.

Halunen-Law-Content-Optimization-SEC-Whistleblower-blog-July-2022-Google-Docs

July 28, 2022

Your career isn’t a game, especially if you face the unexpected, unwanted or unjustified end of your current tenure. But if your employer decides to show you the door and offers you a severance package, you’re playing a high-stakes game, whether you like it or not. As with all negotiations, hashing out a severance package involves strategy, moves and countermoves, calculating potential risks and rewards, and the desire to win.

But as the saying goes, “You can’t win if you don’t play.”

Unfortunately, too many C-suite executives and other high-level employees take themselves out of severance negotiations by giving up. If a soon-to-be-former employer doesn’t offer a severance package, the employee may believe it’s game over and move on. If the employee receives an underwhelming severance proposal, he may not make a counteroffer, thinking he has no leverage or that pushing back will result in his losing the offer.

In either case, failing to negotiate severance is a costly strategic blunder. To see why, apply “game theory” to severance negotiations.

What Is ‘Game Theory’?

Game theory is a mathematical model of interactions between two rational decision-makers when they try to settle conflicts or initiate negotiations. Researchers developed it in the 1940s while trying to find solutions to zero-sum games in which only one of two participants would benefit.

During negotiations, game theory takes many different forms and applies several models, depending on the individuals and circumstances involved. You may have heard of game theory concepts like the prisoner’s dilemma or chicken. The model most often applicable in severance negotiations is what game theory expert and author William Spaniel refers to as the “Ultimatum Game.”

The ‘Ultimatum Game’ and Severance Negotiations

Perhaps the biggest impediment that keeps otherwise business-savvy executives from engaging in severance negotiations is the belief that they have zero bargaining power. They might believe employers hold all the cards. As we previously discussed in detail, this is a costly fallacy.

Employees are mistaken if they believe they have no leverage and that any offer from their employers is a take it or leave it proposition. As Spaniel notes, the ultimatum game shows “that a party with the exclusive right to make proposals has all of the bargaining power.”

But in severance negotiations, the employer does not have the exclusive right to make proposals. An initial offer isn’t an ultimatum. But if employees focus exclusively on their own pressures and priorities without considering their employers’ pressure points, it may seem like one.

If your employer offers you a severance package, the business isn’t doing so out of charity or kindness. The organization wants something from you – a release of any claims you have, your agreement not to compete or your silence. That gives you leverage, which should give you the confidence to make a counteroffer if the initial offer isn’t adequate. According to Spaniel, even making a single counteroffer significantly increases an individual’s bargaining power.

As a result, don’t presume you have no cards to play in the severance negotiation game. Don’t forfeit your opportunity to emerge with a better deal. And remember that your employer plays this game all the time; you don’t. That’s why you should work with an experienced employment lawyer who knows the tactics and strategies that can help you leave your job on a winning note.

If you’d like to discuss a proposed severance package or need assistance with your negotiations, please contact Halunen Law or call us at (612) 605-4098 for a free consultation.

Image Credit: Indypendenz / Shutterstock

May 24, 2022

Halunen Law Blog Image In a rare show of bipartisanship, the Senate passed, and the President signed into law the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (the “Act”). What are arbitration agreements, and how do they affect your employment?

Regardless of their size, many companies manage to squeeze in some sort of an arbitration provision into their employment contracts, non-competes, or even company handbooks. These arbitration clauses are often very broad, requiring employees to forgo their rights to bring any employment-related claims in courts, and forcing them to resolve claims in a private forum—arbitration. Thus, if your employer wrongfully terminates you, even if you bring a claim in court, your employer will have a right to remove your case from court into a private arbitration, where a third-party arbitrator will adjudicate your case.

Employers have utilized this scheme for decades to avoid bad publicity and sweep wrongful conduct under the rug. But this scheme will no longer work as it relates to the sexual harassment/assault claims. The Act allows victims of sexual harassment/assault to disregard the arbitration agreement and pursue their case in a civil court, thus giving them back a right to have their case adjudicated by a jury.
In any case, it is worth remembering that the Act does not force the victim to take the case to court. If the victims of sexual harassment or assault would like to have their claims resolved privately, they still have a right to submit their case to Alternative Dispute Resolution, including arbitration.

The natural question follows—if Congress recognizes how harmful the mandatory arbitration clauses are in employment sexual harassment and assault cases, should such clauses still apply to other discrimination claims? But this is a topic for a different blog.

Halunen Law’s employment law group is a team of tenacious attorneys dedicated to ensuring employee rights and protections. If you feel you’ve experienced illegal action in your workplace, we encourage you to submit a Case Review Form to our firm. One of our attorneys will review your information, and you’ll receive a response from our firm in a timely manner. There is no charge for this confidential process. And, if we take your case, as a contingency-based law firm, there is no cost unless we win.

We’re here to help you navigate your lawful rights and ensure you get the treatment you deserve. Together, we can hold employers accountable and create a fairer workplace for everyone.