WORKPLACE CHALLENGES NEED TIMELY AND REAL-WORLD LEGAL SOLUTIONS
It is not enough to stay on top of the law, because what employers of all sizes are looking for is expertise coupled with a responsive and practical approach to workplace issues that takes into account the client’s goals. That’s where Prince Lobel’s Employment Law Group comes in. We know the law, and we know our clients. Whether it’s helping a client work through an urgent personnel issue, or representing an employer in a court or agency proceeding, Prince Lobel’s employment and labor law attorneys use their knowledge of the law and experience to devise legal solutions to meet our client’s business objectives.
WE OFFER AN EXTENSIVE RANGE OF EMPLOYMENT LAW SERVICES INCLUDING:
- Defending employers against retaliation, harassment, discrimination, and whistleblower claims;
- Representing employers before the United States Department of Labor in wage and hour cases and OSHA matters;
- Representing employers before the Massachusetts Office of Attorney General in cases involving prevailing wage, wage theft, and other wage and hour and overtime disputes;
- Advising on, and litigating, non-competition, confidentiality, and trade secret issues;
- Counseling employers with respect to critical employment decisions, such as terminations and disciplinary actions;
- Assisting clients maintaining non-union status, advising them in representation elections, and defending unfair labor practice charges before the National Labor Relations Board, collective bargaining, grievance handling, and labor arbitrations;
- Drafting employment contracts and severance agreements;
- Preparing employment policies and manuals;
- Establishing programs for compliance with emerging legislation, including the Massachusetts Equal Pay Law, and the Massachusetts Paid Family and Medical Leave Law;
- Assisting clients in responding to investigations or audits by state and federal agencies and regulatory bodies;
- Conducting internal investigations;
- Providing advice regarding workforce reductions; and
- Creating and helping to enforce electronic communications and social media policies.
We offer a variety of employment law training courses and can tailor them to meet the needs of your company. Anti-harassment and discrimination training courses are conducted by instructors who are certified by the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. Our training courses include:
- Addressing and Preventing Unlawful Harassment;
- 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 Claims; and
- Employment Law for Managers.
We also provide one-on-one training sessions for individuals who are having difficulty adhering to workplace norms. These intensive sessions can focus on any aspect of employment law, but typically have involved anti-discriminations/harassment and bullying.
Higher Education and Business Investigations
Media and First Amendment Law
Art and Museum Law
Closely Held Business
Start-ups and Emerging Businesses
Robert A. Bertsche
Steven H. Gans
Walter B. Prince
Laurie F. Rubin
Daniel S. Tarlow
Richard D. Wayne
Joseph L. Edwards Jr.
Paige Scott Reed
We won a favorable decision from the Massachusetts Appeals Court for our client, a 200-officer police department, where the plaintiff, a current police lieutenant, claimed he was disproportionately disciplined due to his race and prior history of complaints. The Appeals Court adopted our argument that the plaintiff had not demonstrated a right to have his claims go to trial, and it affirmed the Superior Court’s dismissal of the case.
We obtained summary judgment for our client, a healthcare provider, in a gender and sexual orientation discrimination and harassment claim brought by a male nurse. The case involved allegations of nurse bullying. Prince Lobel demonstrated to the court that the plaintiff’s claims were too flimsy to go to trial. The court dismissed the case.
We won a complete victory after a multi-day Public Hearing at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. The Commission issued a decision fully exonerating our client, a large public agency that was charged with discriminating against an employee on the basis of race and disability.
We obtained summary judgment for our client, a large Massachusetts employer, on a disability discrimination claim where the plaintiff alleged that the employer failed to accommodate her need to work in a fragrance-free environment. Prince Lobel demonstrated that the claim had no merit and the court dismissed the case.
We obtained summary judgment for our client, a public authority, in a discrimination case in which an employee alleged race discrimination with respect to promotions.
We obtained summary judgment for our client, a prominent teaching hospital, in an age discrimination case.
We successfully defended a public agency in a high-stakes trial in Suffolk Superior Court, a forum that has been notoriously difficult for employers. In a case where the plaintiff sought millions, the jury found in favor of the agency with regard to all but one claim and awarded just $16,000, a great vindication for our client.
Wage and Hour Matters
We won a favorable decision from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in a wage and hour action against our client, a large public authority. The SJC agreed with our argument that the claim should be dismissed, holding that the Wage Act does not require the payout of unused sick time. The court clarified that most forms of incentive bonus compensation are not covered by the Wage Act.
We helped our client, a supplier of equipment to police and fire departments, defeat a competitor’s injunction action seeking to prevent two recent hires from working for our client. The plaintiff claimed the employees were in violation of non-competition agreements. Prince Lobel demonstrated to the court that the good will and industry knowledge belonged to the employees and not their former employer.
We achieved a significant victory in a non-competition enforcement action (in the Massachusetts Appeals Court) for our client, a major Cambridge-based biotech company.