EMPLOYMENT LAW BASICS FOR HAWAII EMPLOYERS: ILLINOIS RULING HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANCE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING TO HAWAII EMPLOYERS
EMPLOYMENT LAW BASICS FOR HAWAII EMPLOYERS: ILLINOIS RULING HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANCE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING TO HAWAII EMPLOYERS
Free Online Articles Directory
Why Submit Articles?
Top Authors
Top Articles
FAQ
AB Answers
0 && $.browser.msie ) {
var ie_version = parseInt($.browser.version);
if(ie_version Hello Guest
Login
Register
Hello
My Home
Sign Out
Email
Password
Remember me?
Lost Password?
Home Page > Law > National, State, Local > EMPLOYMENT LAW BASICS FOR HAWAII EMPLOYERS: ILLINOIS RULING HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANCE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING TO HAWAII EMPLOYERS
EMPLOYMENT LAW BASICS FOR HAWAII EMPLOYERS: ILLINOIS RULING HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANCE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING TO HAWAII EMPLOYERS
Posted: Apr 26, 2009 |Comments: 0
|
]]>
Ask a question
Ask our experts your National, State, Local related questions here…200 Characters left
Related Questions
I heard that an Employer told someone they could not use there personl car on there 15 minute break because they are being payed for it. Is it breaking the law for the employer to have such polices
Explain the effects of fiscal policies in the economy’s production and employment?
I am on permanent disability. I qualified for mortgage through a no dock loan 5 years ago. My common law husband pays the mortgage. He is self employed, income varies. Can he be on my HAMP ?
What are the gun laws in hawaii ?
EMPLOYMENT LAW BASICS FOR HAWAII EMPLOYERS: ILLINOIS RULING HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANCE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING TO HAWAII EMPLOYERS
By: Roman Amaguin
About the Author
Roman Amaguin, Esq. is a employment law lawyer in Hawaii who also regularly practices in the areas of labor law and civil litigation. Mr. Amaguin regularly appears in regularly appears before all federal and state courts in Hawaii, as well as state and federal administrative agencies such as the U.S. EEOC and Hawaii Civil Rights Commission. He understands now is the time for the legal profession to reconsider the manner in which it provides services to the community. Accordingly, flat rate projects and other alternative fee arrangements are always explored with his clients.
Mr. Amaguin litigates a wide range of civil cases involving common law and statutory claims.
Visit his website at www.amaguinlaw.com
(ArticlesBase SC #886332)
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/ – EMPLOYMENT LAW BASICS FOR HAWAII EMPLOYERS: ILLINOIS RULING HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANCE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING TO HAWAII EMPLOYERS
EMPLOYMENT LAW BASICS FOR HAWAII EMPLOYERS: ILLINOIS RULING HIGHLIGHTS THE IMPORTANCE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING TO HAWAII EMPLOYERS
It is well established now under federal Title VII law that an employer is liable for actionable sexual harassment caused by a supervisor with “immediate (or successively higher) authority over the employee.” However, in cases where the employee does not suffer a “tangible employment action,” such as discharge, demotion, or an unfavorable reassignment, there is an affirmative defense that an employer may raise to avoid Title VII liability and damages.
Under such affirmative defense whether an employer has an anti-harassment policy is relevant evidence. Also important is effective supervisory training and training of employees on the harassment policy and complaint procedure.
Training and educational programs for all employees take on an even higher degree of importance under Hawaii state law, HRS Chapter 378. State law currently is interpreted by the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission (“HCRC”) as mandating strict liability for sexual harassment committed by supervisors.
While the Hawaii Supreme Court has not addressed the HCRC’s interpretation of HRS Chapter 378 a recent Illinois Supreme Court decision upheld a Illinois Human Rights Commission ruling addressing a regulation similar to the HCRC’s–that an employer was strictly liable for a supervisor’s harassing conduct under Illinois state law even though the supervisor did not even have direct supervisory authority over the Complainant.
The April 16, 2009 Illinois decision will certainly be persuasive authority to a Hawaii Supreme Court faced with interpreting the HCRC’s regulation. Accordingly, it is critical that Hawaii employers understand the importance of having an effective policy and company-wide training program on not only a defense to a sexual harassment claim, but prevention.
I. The Importance of Having an Effective Harassment Policy
A. The Faragher/Ellerth Defense
Having an effective sexual harassment policy and training program will greatly increase the chance of avoiding liability under the affirmative defense for sexual harassment claims recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) (“Faragher”) and Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 523 U.S. 742 (1998) (“Ellerth”).
Where alleged harassment by a supervisor does not culminate in an adverse (“tangible”) employment decision, the employer may avoid liability by showing that: (1) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any harassing behavior; and (2) the plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer to avoid harm. “A tangible employment action constitutes a significant change in employment status such as hiring, firing, failing to promote, reassignment with significantly different responsibilities or a decision causing a significant change in benefits.” Ellerth, supra.
The importance of the Faragher/Ellerth defense was significantly increased by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129 (2004), which held that the defense is available in constructive discharge cases unless the plaintiff quits in a reasonable response to an employer-sanctioned adverse action of an official nature, such as a demotion or a cut in pay.
A zero-tolerance harassment policy must fit the environment and employees. The Ellerth court stated:
While proof that an employer had promulgated an antiharassment policy with complaint procedure is not necessary in every instance as a matter of law, the need for a stated policy suitable to the employment circumstances may appropriately be addressed in any case when litigating the first element of the defense. The policy should be written in plain English, so that all employees regardless of their educational level or background can understand it … [a] policy should include a clear and precise definition of unlawful harassment so that employees know what type of conduct is prohibited by the policy and will be able to recognize that conduct should it occur.
Accordingly, if the alleged harasser has supervisory authority over the victim, the employer will be held automatically liable for any harassment committed by the supervisor unless the employer is able to successfully raise the affirmative defense.
B. Tips On Drafting a Zero-Tolerance Policy and Complaint Procedure.
(1) Write in simple English.
(2) Include a clear definition and examples of prohibited conduct and make it broad enough to prohibit all forms of harassment.
(3) State the company’s “zero-tolerance” philosophy in the policy regarding all forms of harassment,
(4) Designate at least two specially trained managers who will be responsible for investigating harassment complaints for the company.
(5) Determine the complaint procedure that will be used to investigate complaints of harassment by supervisory employees, co-workers and outsiders.
(6) Provide a “clear chain of communication,” allowing employees to step outside of the normal hierarchy in the event the supervisor is the harasser and consider having a toll-free number employees can call.
(7) State that employees who report prohibited conduct will be protected from retaliation.
(8) State that the employer will promptly investigate the matter in an objective and discrete manner.
(9) Provide the form of disciplinary action to which offenders can expect to be subjected.
(10) State that the employer will also take remedial action.
(11) Train your management employees and line employees on the policy and procedure.
(12) Have each employee sign an acknowledgment form that they have received a copy of the policy and procedure, and that they have received training on the harassment policy.
C. The Faragher/Ellerth Defense and Hawaii Law
Like Title VII, the Hawaii Employment Practices Act prohibits discriminating against individuals in virtually all aspects of employment. However, it remains an open question whether an employer, under Hawaii state law, can assert the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense.
Currently, under regulations promulgated by the HCRC, the state agency charged with the enforcing and interpreting Hawaii’s Employment Practices Act, strict liability would apply to a supervisor’s harassment of a subordinate regardless of whether tangible action is taken:
§12-46-109 Sexual harassment.
(a) Harassment on the basis of sex is a violation of chapter 378, HRS. Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct or visual forms of harassment of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when:
(1) Submission to that conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment; or
(2) Submission to or rejection of that conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting that individual; or
(3) That conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
(b) In determining whether alleged conduct constitutes sexual harassment, the commission will look at the record as a whole and at the totality of the circumstances, such as the nature of the sexual advances and the context in which the alleged incidents occurred. The determination of the legality of a particular action will be made from the facts, on a case by case basis.
(c) An employer shall be responsible for its acts and those of its agents and supervisory employees with respect to sexual harassment regardless of whether the specific acts complained of were authorized or even forbidden, and regardless of whether the employer or other covered entity knew or should have known of their occurrence. The commission will examine the circumstances of the particular employment relationship and the job functions performed by the individual in determining whether an individual acted in either a supervisory or agency capacity.
(d) With respect to conduct between employees, an employer shall be responsible for acts of sexual harassment in the workplace where the employer or its agents or supervisory employees knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. An employee who has been sexually harassed on the job by a co-worker should inform the employer, its agent, or supervisory employee of the harassment; however, an employee’s failure to give such notice may not be an affirmative defense.
D. Problem Areas for Employers
* Inadequate complaint procedure
* Failure to disseminate policy
* Employer on notice of harassment
* Failure to promptly investigate
* Failure to take appropriate disciplinary action
* Failure to apply it even-handedly
* Failure to review and revise when necessary
* Failure to provide training
E. Illinois Supreme Court Decision a Foreshadowing of Hawaii Law?
In Sangamon Cty Sheriff’s Dep’t v. The Illinois Human Rights Comm’n, Nos. 105517, 105518 cons. (Ill. Apr. 16, 2009), decided on April 16, 2009, the Illinois Supreme Court gave the HCRC direct support of the HCRC’s own interpretation of HRS Chapter 378.
The Sangamon decision holds Illinois employers strictly liable for sexual harassment by any of their management or supervisory personnel, and, as noted by the dissent, “imposes a standard of liability which appears to be without precedent in any jurisdiction of the United States.”
In that case employee Feleccia filed a sexual harassment claim against employer Sangamon County Sheriff’s Department and Ron Yanor, who was a supervisor, but was not Feleccia’s direct supervisor. The Illinois Human Rights Commission ruled that the Sheriff’s Department was strictly liable for Yanor’s conduct under the Act because Yanor was a supervisor. The Illinois appellate court reversed, and Feleccia and the Commission appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.
The Illinois Supreme Court reversed and confirmed the Commission’s decision. In a 4-2 ruling, the Illinois Supreme Court agreed that the Sheriff’s Department could be held strictly liable in such circumstances. The basis of the decision was the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute, which states that “an employer shall be responsible for sexual harassment of the employer’s employees by nonemployees or nonmanagerial and nonsupervisory employees only if the employer becomes aware of the conduct and fails to take reasonable corrective measures.”
According to the Court, the statute is unambiguous” and only excludes “nonemployees” and “nonmanagerial or nonsupervisory employees” from its strict liability standard. As such, the Court found “[t]here is no language in the Act that limits the employer’s liability based on the harasser’s relationship to the victim.” The Court rejected the employer’s argument that federal case law should apply to the case.
II. The Importance of Conducting EEO Training
Of course, in Hawaii the HCRC has merely interpreted HRS Chapter 378’s statutory language to impose strict liability for supervisory harassment. Unlike the Illinois statute interpreted by the Illinois Supreme Court it is reasonable to argue that Hawaii statutory law is ambiguous and not straightforward.
Nevertheless, the HCRC is charged with the interpretation and enforcement of HRS Chapter 378 and it does not bode well for Hawaii employers that another state’s high court is willing to impose what some would consider harsh penalties on the employer defendant. Accordingly, employers in Hawaii should redouble its efforts to train supervisors AND employees regularly on preventing discrimination and harassment in the workplace. Training should include the consequences of violating company policy.
Training employees reduces the likelihood that inappropriate conduct will be engaged in or tolerated at a level that can create a hostile environment. See Arquero v. Hilton Hawaiian Village, 104 Hawai’i 423, 91 P.3d 505 (2004) (coworker pinched buttocks of the plaintiff on two occasions); Nelson v. University of Hawai’i, 97 Hawai’i 376, 38 P.3d 95 (2001) (verbal harassment).
Second, in the event that inappropriate conduct takes place, employees who are offended will be substantially more likely to use the employer’s complaint procedure, thereby permitting the employer to remedy the situation and avoid having a lawsuit filed against it.
Lastly, training is a tool for prevention and reducing the potential of supervisory harassment.
A. Training as a Tool for Prevention
The EEOC’s Policy Guidance on Sexual Harassment states:
An employer should ensure that its supervisors and managers understand their responsibilities under the organization’s anti-harassment policy and complaint procedure. Periodic training of those individuals can help achieve that result. Such training should explain the types of conduct that violate the employer’s anti-harassment policy; the seriousness of the policy; the responsibilities of supervisors and managers when they learn of alleged harassment; and the prohibition against retaliation.
The HCRC regulations state that “prevention is the best tool for the elimination of sexual harassment. Employers should affirmatively raise the subject, express strong disapproval, develop appropriate sanctions, inform employees of their right to raise and how to raise the issue of sexual harassment, and take any other steps necessary to prevent sexual harassment from occurring.” §12-46-109(g).
As part of its settlements against employers, the EEOC and HCRC have chosen mandatory training as one of its primary responses through the use of consent decrees requiring organizations to conduct training and ensure policy compliance.
In 2004, the California Legislature passed Assembly Bill 1825, requiring all employers with fifty or more employees to conduct compulsory sexual harassment training for all of its supervisory employees by January of 2006, thus supporting the EEOC and HCRC’s position that training and education is the best tool for prevention. Under the California law, the training must re-occur every two years, and all new supervisors brought in after the original round of training must go through the program within six months of their arrival.
Managers who are aware of the implications of sexual harassment may be less likely to take official action they realize will create vicarious liability for the organization – this may preserve the employer’s right to the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense in a case of constructive discharge. Further, managers who are aware of how to proceed with complaints from employees about harassment are more likely to intervene with an appropriate employer response thus making a stronger showing under the first prong of the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense.
Finally, as noted throughout this article training can be an effective tool to combat inappropriate behavior by supervisors and to reduce risks under state law—especially to the extent it is interpreted similar to the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision.
B. Training and the Faragher/Ellerth Defense
Conducting training will greatly increase the chance of avoiding liability under the Faragher/Ellerth affirmative defense. The importance of this defense was significantly increased by the Suders decision, which held that the defense is available in constructive discharge cases unless the plaintiff quits in a reasonable response to an employer-sanctioned adverse action of an official nature, such as a demotion or a cut in pay.
The training of rank and file employees should be documented and if it is to be conducted on a regular basis, can include a certification by the employee that he or she has not been subject to any policy violations since the last training.
C. Training and Damages Issues Under Hawaii Law
Generally, individuals cannot be found liable for violations under federal law. Under Hawaii law, however, courts may award unlimited punitive and compensatory damages.
Significantly, unlike under Title VII individuals can be held liable for violations of Hawaii’s Employment Practices Act. See HRS §378-1 (defining “employer” to include “any person”) and §378-2 (3) (making it unlawful for any “person” to “aid, abet, incite, compel, or coerce the doing of any of the discriminatory practices forbidden by this part, or to attempt to do so.”); Schefke v. Reliable Collection Agency, 96 Hawai’i 408; 32 P.3d 52, 93-94 (2001) (holding individuals may be found liable under Hawai’i Employment Practices law).
Thus, training employees may alert them to the financial risks they take when they engage in behaviors prohibited by Hawaii law.
D. Training to Reduce Exposure to Punitive Damages
In Kolstad v. American Dental Association, the Court held that “in the punitive damages context, an employer may not be vicariously liable for the discriminatory employment decisions of managerial agents where these decisions are contrary to the employer’s ‘good-faith efforts to comply with Title VII.’” Accordingly, compliance efforts are both necessary and sufficient to avoid liability for punitive damages.
Roman Amaguin, Esq.; http://www.virtualhawaiiemploymentlawyer.com; http://www.amaguinlaw.com
(ArticlesBase SC #886332)
Roman Amaguin -
About the Author:
Roman Amaguin, Esq. is a employment law lawyer in Hawaii who also regularly practices in the areas of labor law and civil litigation. Mr. Amaguin regularly appears in regularly appears before all federal and state courts in Hawaii, as well as state and federal administrative agencies such as the U.S. EEOC and Hawaii Civil Rights Commission. He understands now is the time for the legal profession to reconsider the manner in which it provides services to the community. Accordingly, flat rate projects and other alternative fee arrangements are always explored with his clients.
Mr. Amaguin litigates a wide range of civil cases involving common law and statutory claims.
Visit his website at www.amaguinlaw.com
]]>
Rate this Article
vote(s)
0 vote(s)
Feedback
RSS
Print
Email
Re-Publish
Article Tags:
faragher, ellerth, hawaii law, hawaii attorney, discrimination, harassment, hawaii lawyer, employment law, wrongful termination, sexual harassment, employment lawyer, labor law, labor attorney, retaliation, employment attorney, amaguin
Latest National, State, Local Articles
More from Roman Amaguin
If I work more than 40 hours in a week, must I settle for my salary? Knowing the law may be a bonus… (02:15)
How to Fire Someone the Right Way
When firing an employee, there’s a right way, a wrong way, and a way that leads to litigation. (01:32)
What Not to Ask During an Interview
When you interview a job candidate in person, don’t get too personal. And don’t ask questions like . (02:17)
Just how far must the boss go to accommodate disabled workers? The law provides both questions and answers. (02:16)
Some regulations only apply to larger employers. Does that mean small business can get away with more? (01:31)
Quick Claim Deed Form For Part Title Transfer
A deed refers to the document, which transfers the interest of land from one party or individual (grantor) to other (grantee). It may also be identified as the real estate contract or agreement. The other name for the quick claim deed is the “Quit Claim Deed”. It basically transmits the interest of the grantor has in the piece of property to the grantee.
By:
deepakl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 26, 2010
Termination Letter for Employee Mention the Reason of the Dismissal
One of the most difficult parts while running a firm or an office is to fire an employee. It is not the task, which one enjoys to do. However, there are numerous ways, of terminating an employee smoothly, with no issues. One of the ways is type out and sent the termination letter for employee.
By:
deepakl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 26, 2010
The Recent Identity Theft Scams
One of the most profitable scams being perpetrated against individuals today is the theft of personal information, with which the thief can take advantage of a person’s credit rating and all the potential benefits that go along with it. By using internet access and email, the thieves no longer have to use the telephone or dig through garbage cans as most of the recent identity theft scams give the victim the chance to volunteer their personal information.
By:
lisa lucerol
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 25, 2010
Accutane Lawsuits and Bowel Disease
There have been numerous successful Accutane lawsuits filed already. This drug, officially withdrawn from the market in 2009, is associated with two very serious conditions of the digestive system. Accutane inflammatory bowel disease includes both Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.
By:
Scott Phillipsl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 24, 2010
Outsourcing the Legal Processes to India
There are numerous legal process outsourcing (LPO) work which is being outsourced in the Indian market & now LPO has become rising knowledge sector offering plenty of good earning opportunities to young and experienced law graduates who want to earn good amount of money.
By:
Nyima Galestainl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 24, 2010
An equine attorney knows the common mistakes done in drafting these agreements and will help you to be protected by the law. In order to have a document protecting your interests, you need to get in touch with an equine attorney, which holds specialization in this domain.
By:
Emiley Davidl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 24, 2010
this article will show you the before and aftermath of receving a speeding ticket and advice on what you can do about it!!
By:
bruce connerl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 24, 2010
St. Louis Criminal Attorney & Accident Lawyer – Source Of Justice For The Civilians
The law firms in St. Louis provide for several attorneys to deal with multiple legal issues. Distinct categories of lawyers are there including St. Louis criminal attorney as well as St. Louis accident lawyer who are responsible to represent the victim’s case in a lawsuit making sure that they get justice.
By:
Jackson Wilsonl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Nov 24, 2010
Hawaii Employment Law Basics: Statutory Leaves of Absences
Employment policies may provide for many different leaves of absence. Except for leave to vote, no Hawaii law requires paid leave for any leave of absence. Here is a brief summary of statutorily-protected leaves of absence in Hawaii.
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Jul 30, 2009
Hawaii Employment Law Basics: Medical Examinations and Disability Law
Hawaii’s Employment Practices law and the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibit employers from discriminating against employees and applicants who have disabilities. Physical examinations cannot be administered or used in a way that disproportionately screens out disabled individuals. Medical examinations of job applicants cannot be required until after a conditional offer of employment is made; examinations of current employees must be job related and consistent with business necessity.
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Jul 28, 2009
Hawaii employers could have a federal civil remedy available in federal court in addition to the ability to invoke Hawaii criminal statutory law for damages caused to either its network or company-owned computers by former employees
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Law>
Cyber Lawl
Jul 20, 2009
lViews: 270
Jail Term for Employee Underscores Importance of Hawaii Employers Complying with HIPAA
Given the security breach that led to the tragic events, including the one-year jail term for the defendant, Hawaii employers, health care providers and health plans should review their privacy and HIPAA policies and conduct an audit of their practices in order to protect against the improper use and disclosure of private health information and to reduce the risk of privacy breaches in their own organization.
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Jun 28, 2009
lViews: 158
It is hard to argue with studies concluding that there is a correlation between the increase in domestic violence being reported and the weak economy. It is critical under these circumstances that Hawaii employers understand that the Hawaii Victims Leave Act requires all Hawaii employers to provide eligible employees with at least 5 days of unpaid victims leave. All employees who have worked for at least 6 consecutive months for the employer are eligible for victims leave.
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Law>
National, State, Locall
Jun 14, 2009
Given the amount of attention given to immigration issues on a national scale, the significant increase in national origin claims being filed with the EEOC in the last few years is no surprise. Many of these claims arise from employers promulgating English-Only policies. In the EEOC’s view only the most limited policies do not violate Title VII.
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Lawl
May 22, 2009
A bill which will allow unions to organize agricultural employers without a secret ballot election, HB 952 CD1, was passed on May 8, 2009, by the Hawaii Legislature. Governor Lingle will have until June 30, 2009 to issue a veto message. The card check bill closely mirrors President Obama’s Employee Free Choice Act. Generally, EFCA would require the National Relations Board to certify a labor union as the exclusive bargaining agent for an approprate unit under the 50% plus one employee rule
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Law>
National, State, Locall
May 19, 2009
Feds Taking Steps to Amend Federal Arbitration Act and Overturn Penn Plaza Decision
If the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2009 (AFA) (S. 931) (H.R. 1020) passes it will overturn the controversial decision rendered in April 2009 by the U.S. Supreme Court in 14 Penn Plaza v. Pyett (“Penn Plaza”) and permit employees to pursue unlawful discrimination claims in a court of law instead of being forced to puruse relief in an arbitration under provisions of a collective bargaining agreement.
By:
Roman Amaguinl
Law>
National, State, Locall
May 13, 2009
lViews: 158
Add new Comment
Your Name: *
Your Email:
Comment Body: *
Verification code:*
* Required fields
Submit
Your Articles Here
It’s Free and easy
Sign Up Today
Author Navigation
My Home
Publish Article
View/Edit Articles
View/Edit Q&A
Edit your Account
Manage Authors
Statistics Page
Personal RSS Builder
My Home
Edit your Account
Update Profile
View/Edit Q&A
Publish Article
Author Box
Roman Amaguin has 18 articles online
Articles Categories
All Categories
Advertising
Arts & Entertainment
Automotive
Beauty
Business
Careers
Computers
Education
Finance
Food and Beverage
Health
Hobbies
Home and Family
Home Improvement
Internet
Law
Marketing
News and Society
Relationships
Self Improvement
Shopping
Spirituality
Sports and Fitness
Technology
Travel
Writing
Bankruptcy
Copyright
Criminal
Cyber Law
Health and Safety
Immigration
Intellectual Property
Internet Law
National, State, Local
Patents
Personal Injury
Regulatory Compliance
Trademarks
]]>
Need Help?
Contact Us
FAQ
Submit Articles
Editorial Guidelines
Blog
Site Links
Recent Articles
Top Authors
Top Articles
Find Articles
Site Map
Webmasters
RSS Builder
RSS
Link to Us
Business Info
Advertising
Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy | User published content is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Copyright © 2005-2010 Free Articles by ArticlesBase.com, All rights reserved.
Roman Amaguin, Esq. is a employment law lawyer in Hawaii who also regularly practices in the areas of labor law and civil litigation. Mr. Amaguin regularly appears in regularly appears before all federal and state courts in Hawaii, as well as state and federal administrative agencies such as the U.S. EEOC and Hawaii Civil Rights Commission. He understands now is the time for the legal profession to reconsider the manner in which it provides services to the community. Accordingly, flat rate projects and other alternative fee arrangements are always explored with his clients.
Mr. Amaguin litigates a wide range of civil cases involving common law and statutory claims.
Visit his website at www.amaguinlaw.com
Article from articlesbase.com
A short video featuring my brother on people with Autism in the workplace.
Video Rating: 4 / 5
Find More Employment Articles
