On April 22, 2013, Governor Dayton signed HF 290 into law, which modified Minnesota’s False Claims Act found at Minn. Stat. § 15C. The bill primarily changed the statute so that it would reward and facilitate False Claims Act cases at least as effectively as the federal law. By making these changes Minnesota should be eligible to receive a 10% higher recovery from Medicaid fraud cases involving Minnesota.
Greater protections for Minnesota whistleblowers became a reality on May 24, 2013, when Governor Dayton signed HF542, which enhanced Minnesota’s Whistleblower Act, Minn. Stat. §181.932.
The Act prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who report violations of statutes or regulations, or refuse to engage in conduct that violates the law. The legislative changes increase whistleblower protection in several ways:
A professor at Macalester College is suing her employer, alleging gender discrimination, as well as race and national origin discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
The woman is currently a full professor with tenure at the college, teaching creative writing in its English department. However, the professor claims that she was wrongfully denied several promotions over the years. The first alleged act of discrimination came in 2003, when she was passed over for an associate professor position. Although the professor was subsequently promoted to an associate professor position with full tenure in 2005, she claims she again experienced workplace discrimination when she applied for a full professor position in 2009.
It’s fairly unusual to hear of a wrongful termination case with ties to an uprising, but one former Microsoft employee says that the tech giant fired him after he spoke to the press about his experience escaping Libya during the recent revolution. As many readers know, last year’s Libyan revolution was extremely violent and led many to flee the country.
The man in this case says that before he was able to leave Libya, he experienced severe emotional trauma, leaving him with post-traumatic stress disorder. He says his job with Microsoft was one of the things that made him a target for violence, and being targeted motivated him to flee when he had the opportunity as a U.S. citizen.
Many Minnesota readers know that it is illegal to discriminate against employees who become pregnant. Current laws afford protection from being treated unfairly, paid less, denied work or promotional opportunities, or retaliating against a worker who takes maternity or paternity leave. Those protections have helped accomplish a lot for employees and have made the situation much better for pregnant employees, but the truth is that the law still falls short of making sure that employers can’t discriminate against pregnant workers.
One area where protection is still lacking is in the requirement that employers make accommodations for pregnant workers. While the law enforces reasonable accommodations for disabled workers, pregnant workers who have a temporary change in physical capabilities are not entitled to accommodations. This means that if a pregnant worker with a job that requires standing asks for more frequent breaks to sit or requests a chair, they could face retaliation and it would be perfectly legal.
A truck driver is suing his former employer, saying that DMS Express refused to allow him a reasonable accommodation so that he could treat his diabetes and anxiety properly, and that he was wrongfully terminated in retaliation for voicing his concerns.
The dispute arose when the driver asked his employer if he could take a short break and drive about four miles to a nearby pharmacy to fill a prescription before he started a long drive across several states. He says he made the request two days in advance and that it was denied by supervisors who insisted that he get on the road as quickly as possible. When the driver offered an alternative time that he might take a break to pick up medications he was denied again.
A female police officer recently filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission after enduring about four years of sexual harassment from her boss in the internal affairs bureau.
The woman says that she was the victim of unwanted sexual advances, coercion, sexual harassment, and a range of other reprehensible conduct that would be objectionable even if it wasn’t happening in the workplace.
A franchise owning company of 25 McDonald’s restaurants was fined $1 million in a lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission following an investigation of sexual harassment complaints at one of its Midwest locations.
The EEOC responded to reports of sexual comments, kissing, and other inappropriate touching forced upon female employees by their male coworkers. The EEOC says that the franchise owner knew about the sexual harassment and not only failed to act to stop it, but retaliated against female employees who complained and permitting male employees to continue the behavior.
An experienced and well-regarded security official who has worked with the NBA and the Olympic Basketball team for many years has filed a lawsuit against the women’s team coach. She says that the coach made unwanted sexual advances towards her while they were traveling with a team in Russia in 2009. She refused his advances and said that immediately afterwards he displayed hostility towards her and spoke poorly of her to the team.
The woman has worked for the USA Basketball team for the past two Summer Olympic games in Athens and Beijing and had planned to work on the London games this year. In a conference call with league officials she learned that the coach had instructed the league that she should not work with his team.
The tech world is reeling after a prominent female partner at one of the industry’s major venture capital firms filed a sexual harassment lawsuit. The complaint details a pattern of mistreatment of female employees at the firm and reveals details of what many insiders already knew to be a male-centric industry.
The issues raised in the lawsuit filing were echoed in the comments of other women working in the venture capital world as well as entrepreneurs seeking investments. One woman told a reporter that she was explicitly denied a job at a prominent venture firm because of her gender and that in the 12 years since that happened, the company has still not hired a single female partner.