By: Brandon Sipherd

The NBA 2009 season began this week and luckily for players and fans alike, it began with its official crew of referees. Players, coaches and fans can breathe a sigh of relief that this season won’t be interfered with by B-squad referees making questionable calls. After a summer-long-lock-out, last Friday the NBA’s 57 referees approved a new two-year collective bargaining agreement.

Referees, under the previous collective bargaining agreement, enjoyed retirement bonuses of upwards of $575,000 and pension benefits that exceeded $2 million, with entry level referees making about $150,000 per year and senior referees making more than $550,000 per year. According to NBA Commissioner, David Stern, the league offered to keep current salaries while reducing the league’s referee costs by changing retirement benefits, travel budget and per diems to “bring their numbers in line with other league employees.” The league originally asked the referees to take $3.2 million in cuts while the National Basketball Referees Association offered to take $2.5 million in cuts. In addition, the NBA accepted the union’s demand for a unique two-year deal so that referees could renegotiate when the economy hopefully improves.

Lamell McMorris, of the National Basketball Referees Association, feels there was a pervasive, underlying sentiment to the negation not connected to the terms of the deal. He believes the league might be trying to push out older referees and may even be sending a message to NBA players, whose collective bargaining agreement expires after the 2011 season.

At Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC, our employment law attorneys are dedicated to resolving issues of wage disputes and discrimination in the workplace and elsewhere. Our firm has had considerable success in handling matters such as these throughout Long Island and the New York City area. We take great pride not only in providing quality legal service and representation, but also in being there for clients when they need it most.

For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658.

By: Elizabeth Lopez

AT&T Services, Inc., doing business as Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, L.P. (AT&T), a major telephone company, violated federal law by refusing to hire an applicant simply because he is an insulin-dependent diabetic, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit.

According to the suit, AT&T violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to hire an applicant as a cable splicer technician only because of his “insulin use” for type 2 diabetes.

The applicant indisputably had the necessary experience and expertise to perform the job and had previously safely performed a similar job for AT&T for many years after he was diagnosed with diabetes, however he was still denied employment. Refusing to hire a qualified individual because of his or her disability, record of disability, or because the employer perceives a person as being disabled, violates the ADA.

After the EEOC’s San Antonio Field office determined that AT&T had violated the law, it filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division. The EEOC seeks back pay, compensatory damages and punitive damages for the victim, as well as injunctive relief.

Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC is an established employment and civil rights law firm representing victims of discrimination throughout Long Island, the entire New York City area and nationwide. We understand the distinction between the words, “inability” and “disability” and have been working to get that message across to employers for more than two decades.

If you believe you are a victim of discrimination call Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658 for a free and confidential consultation.

By: Elizabeth Lopez

Former Miss California USA Carrie Prejean sued pageant officials for libel, slander and religious discrimination, accusing them of telling her to stop mentioning God. Prejean sued California pageant executive director Keith Lewis and former Miss USA Shanna Moakler after she was fired in June by pageant officials who claimed it was a result of her missing several scheduled appearances. Prejean claims that it was “not true and that she was ousted because of her controversial remarks.”

She was named first runner-up and many believe that she lost her shot at the crown because of her answer regarding her religious views and gay marriage. Prejean’s attorney found no proof that Prejean missed any events nor were “there any contract violations,” he said.

The lawsuit claims that Lewis and Moakler both told Prejean not to mention God on her Miss USA application or at public events. Moakler’s attorney said in a statement that Prejean’s lawsuit was without merit, however for her love of God Prejean looks forward to proving that she did nothing wrong in a court of law.

Leeds, Morelli & Brown is always available to advise you about your First Amendment rights regarding the freedom of religious expression.
For any questions, contact an attorney at the Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC for a free consultation at 1-800-585-4658.

By: Lee Hagy

Have you been demoted or laid off from a job and felt that your age was a factor in your employer’s decision?  Congress today took action to prevent this type of age-discrimination to protect your rights and to make workplaces fair.

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony on a proposed bill that would reverse the outcome of the Supreme Court’s June finding in Gross v. FBL Financial Services.  In that controversial 5-4 decision, the Court held that plaintiffs bringing an age-discrimination case must meet the tough burden of proving that their age was the deciding factor in their demotion or termination.

Prior to this decision, an employee only had to show that age was one of the factors that motivated his or her employer’s adverse employment decision.  Once this fact had been established, the burden then fell on the employer to show that it had acted for a valid reason other than age discrimination.   The three Congressmen bringing the bill said that the ruling of the Supreme Court created unfair obstacles to the victims of age-discrimination’s ability to hold employers accountable under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).

At Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC, we believe that discrimination at work, or anywhere else, has no place in a free and democratic society. Our firm has won precedent-setting decisions involving employment discrimination and is an established authority on this subject. In every matter, whether it involves filing an ADEA complaint on behalf of one individual or litigating a class action lawsuit — we take great pride not only in providing outstanding legal service and representation, but also in simply being there for clients at a time when they need it most.

For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658.