- New Background Check Law in Massachusetts – Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in April 1, 2013 “Job Doc” Column
- Jeffrey A. Dretler Selected For Leadership Role on ABA Labor and Employment Law Section Subcommittee
- Joseph L. Edwards, Jr. Appointed to MCAD Advisory Board
- CORI Checks and Revealing Date of Birth – Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in September 24, 2012 “Job Doc” Column
- Asking About a Candidate’s Salary – Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in May 14, 2012 “Job Doc” Column
- Financial Background Checks on Candidates – Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in January 16, 2012 “Job Doc” Column
- “In Loco Parentis” Status When Caring for a Sibling – Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in September 26, 2011 “Job Doc” Column
- Date of Birth Inquiry – Is It Acceptable? Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in August 15, 2011 “Job Doc” Column
- FMLA for a Sibling? Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in June 13, 2011 “Job Doc” Column
- Knowing a Neighbor’s Past Record: Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in March 14, 2011 “Job Doc” Column
- When is a Doctor’s Note Required?: Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in September 27, 2010 “Job Doc” Column
- Using Vacation Time During a Leave: Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in July 26, 2010 “Job Doc” Column
- Personal Items Found in an Inherited Desk: Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in April 12, 2010 “Job Doc” Column
- Daniel S. Tarlow on WBZ Radio Discussing Recent Ruling in Favor of Prince Lobel Client MBCR
- Daniel S. Tarlow Quoted on Boston.com Regarding Important Decision in Favor of MBCR
- COBRA Benefits for Family Members in the US: Jeffrey A. Dretler Provides Advice in February 22, 2010 “Job Doc” Column
The Employment Law Group at Prince Lobel gets results. Clients rely on the firm's employment attorneys to identify and resolve issues before they become major concerns. If a problem does develop into litigation, our employment lawyers litigate with great success, representing a broad array of employers in state and federal courts and before government agencies. We also train employers to limit risk by devising and implementing sound employment practices.
The firm’s Employment Law Practice Group offers a broad range of employment law services including:
- Defending employers against retaliation discrimination, whistleblower, wage and hour claims, and defamation claims
- Advising on and litigating non-competition, confidentiality, and trade secret issues
- Counseling with respect to critical employment decisions, such as terminations and disciplinary actions
- Drafting employment contracts and severance agreements
- Preparing employment policies and manuals
- Ensuring compliance with state and federal legislation, including Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Fair Labor Standards Act
- Conducting wage and hour audits and advising employers on worker classification issues
- Assisting clients in responding to investigations or audits by state and federal agencies and regulatory bodies
- Providing advice with respect to plant closings and workforce reductions
- Providing policy advice with regard to the use of email, Internet, social media and personal blogs
- Considering and pursuing alternative dispute resolutions
Lobel offers a variety of employment
law training courses, and can tailor any course to meet your needs.
Anti-harassment and discrimination training courses are conducted by
certified by the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. A
of our training courses include:
- Addressing and Preventing
- Assessing the Need for and
Providing Reasonable Accommodations
- Avoiding Pitfalls in Hiring,
Discipline, and Termination
- Meeting the Challenges of Social Media Use in the Workplace
- Avoiding Wage and Hour
- Basic Employment Law for Managers
All of our
trainings can be modified for newly hired managers and employees,
or for those requiring only refresher courses.
For more information on our Employment Law Practice Group or the firm's training programs, please contact Group Chair Daniel S. Tarlow at firstname.lastname@example.org or 617 456 8013.
Defense of Discrimination Claims
Lobel successfully defended class-action
claims brought by employees who sought to represent all black and Hispanic
employees denied promotions at the employer railroad. After months of
factual discovery, extensive legal briefing, and a lengthy oral argument to the
court, a United States district court judge refused to certify the class. The
victory was significant for Prince Lobel's client, and had even wider
implications for employers who may face similar class
Lobel attorneys defended their client and ten male supervisors against claims
by six female former employees, each of whom claimed that she was subjected to gender discrimination and retaliation.
Among their claims, the women contended that they received inferior equipment
and were subjected to harsher discipline than similarly situated males who
worked for the company. The plaintiffs sought compensatory and punitive damages
against the company, in addition to attorney fees and costs. Prince Lobel's attorneys
proved that, with the right facts, juries can get beyond first impressions
created by "me too" evidence. After a five-week trial, the jury
returned a take-nothing verdict in favor of Prince Lobel's client and the ten male
Lobel represented a start-up technology company and the members of its board of
directors in a case brought by its founder alleging that the company had
engaged in age discrimination
when it terminated his employment at age 79 in a layoff. Through an exhaustive
presentation of the facts to the Massachusetts Commission Against
Discrimination at the prehearing stage, we were able to get all of the claims
attorneys obtained EEOC dismissal of gender
discrimination and retaliation claims brought by a female news reporter
against our client, a cable and Internet financial news program.
federal court awarded summary judgment to Prince Lobel’s client, a large
transportation entity, three weeks before trial was scheduled to begin. The
decision dismissed a long-term employee’s claims that he had been subjected to race discrimination and retaliation by his Caucasian supervisors for
many years, including during the time period after an arbitrator ordered the
employee reinstated to his former position as part of a union grievance
and Trade Secret Cases
Lobel represented a major sporting goods manufacturer in a trade secret
misappropriation case against a former employee who went to work for a
competitor. After employing an early and aggressive computer forensic strategy,
Prince Lobel was able to bring the matter to a successful conclusion with a
favorable consent decree which the federal court judge endorsed as the judgment
in the case.
Lobel represented a start-up private equity investment firm in a
non-competition lawsuit. Prince Lobel’s attorneys worked around-the-clock over
a weekend to respond to a motion for a preliminary injunction that was served
with little notice. Prince Lobel’s efforts paid off - the motion was defeated,
and, once the injunction was denied, a negotiated resolution was arrived at
that allowed Prince Lobel’s client to carry on its business.
- When an
international vice president responsible for sales left the client’s employ to
work for one of its chief competitors, Prince Lobel successfully prevented
the former employee from competing with the client for the duration of the
employee’s non-compete agreement
by obtaining court orders restricting the scope of the employee’s employment in
his new position.
Wage and Hour Matters
- Prince Lobel defended
a national magazine in federal court against an allegation that it had misclassified a sales representative as an
independent contractor rather than an employee.
- After a disgruntled
former restaurant worker complained to both the Massachusetts Attorney
General’s office and the U.S. Department of Labor about wage and hour
violations, Prince Lobel helped its client avoid a time-consuming and
disruptive multiyear audit of its payroll records and convinced the authorities
to suspend their investigation without issuing penalties of any kind.
- Prince Lobel represented an employer in an investigation
conducted by the Massachusetts Attorney General into an employee’s overtime and
minimum wage claims. Prince Lobel was able to convince the attorney general’s
office not to pursue the matter.
Lobel provided ongoing advice to a company that was trying to cope with a
difficult and poorly performing employee who was raising unfounded harassment
claims, and assisted the company in developing a strategy to discharge the
employee for performance issues without giving rise to an actionable claim of
Lobel counseled an employer on a strategy for evaluating and responding to an
employee’s request for extended time off, including drafting written
communications to the employee and his doctor.
Lobel advised an employer on how to respond to a potential threat of violence
in the workplace, including coordination with a security specialist to evaluate
the potential for violence and to develop an appropriate response to avoid
inflaming the situation.
- An employer
contacted Prince Lobel when it suspected that an employee had not been honest
during a sexual harassment investigation. Our attorneys advised the client at
every step of its dealings with the employee, from ascertaining whether the
employee was, in fact, dishonest, to deciding whether termination was the
proper measure of discipline, to executing the termination. At the DUA
hearing, the client had all of the evidence it needed to show that it acted
reasonably in terminating the employee.
Lobel advised a long-time client on a reduction in force by assisting the
employer with establishing and analyzing selection criteria, and the analysis
of demographic data. Prince Lobel also drafted all of the termination notices
and agreements to comply with federal and state laws.
Lobel obtained the dismissal of a 17-count complaint brought by a police
officer against his department in which the officer alleged various civil rights and tort claims relating to his
alleged whistleblowing activity. By adopting an aggressive legal
strategy, and mastering complex legal and factual arguments, Prince Lobel
was able to defeat the claims early on, thus avoiding costly and
Lobel won a significant decision when the trial court awarded summary judgment
in favor of our client, a day care center for the children of hospital
employees. The decision is meaningful for employers as it confirms that a claim
for wrongful termination in
violation of public policy is a very narrow exception to the at-will employment
doctrine and does not constitute a catch-all cause of action. The court found
that to sustain a claim of that type, an employee must identify a "clearly
defined" public policy articulated by the legislature.
former employee of a high-tech company filed a complaint under USERRA asserting that his employer had
failed to honor its obligation to rehire him after his tour of duty ended.
Prince Lobel was able to successfully resolve the case by persuading the
Department of Labor that the employee’s claim was likely time-barred and
negated by the reduction in force.