I currently represent, and I have historically represented, many employees who work for various local and state agencies and government entities, as well as employees of Federal agencies, in employment, civil rights and pension matters. The majority of the matters involve assisting employees who are in the process of being reprimanded or removed, or alleging they have been discriminated against in some form. At any given time I have many cases of this type in progress, and within the last few years I have opposed the U.S. Postal Service, the U.S. Mint, the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of the Navy, the FBI, the Department of the Interior, and the Social Security Administration, and this is only a partial list.
I also represent employees in various situations involving private employers. The difference between representing employees working in the private sector is that generally a resolution can be reached between the parties without resorting to extensive and expensive litigation. There are always exceptions, but it is generally easier dealing with businesses which are aware that fighting tooth and nail against a current or former employee, may not be cost-effective for them in the long run, and may also be bad for other employees' morale. Private businesses, or their lawyers, generally consider the effect litigation will have on their bottom line, even if they feel they have a wonderful defense.
However, government entities don't seem to take into consideration the financial impact of litigating a case, whether it is before a government agency, or in court. This disappoints me to no end, in a couple of ways. First, I feel that my money is being wasted as a taxpayer. Government agencies have attorneys working for them, and their mantra seems to be "we don't have authority to offer any money (or a very low amount is offered) to settle this case". This is laughable, because the Federal Government obviously has gobs of money, and seems to waste a lot of it. I am not saying agencies should give money to every employee who makes a claim, but a cost benefit analysis, which is routinely performed by private business, should be conducted. I have two examples where the agencies are spending thousands and thousands of dollars against long-term employees who they are attempting to remove from their jobs. The first example is that the Postal Service is opposing a man who can perform his work if he is permitted to sit in a sliding chair due to a back condition, and has been provided with this chair for many years. They have removed his chair, and now he is receiving unemployment compensation because he is not being permitted to work. We are fighting to have his chair returned to him, permitting him to work. Unfortunately, this type of situation is rampant these days as the Postal Service is losing money, and is trying to eliminate disabled employees who can work if given a small accommodation as required by the Americans with Disability Act.
The second example is that at a recent hearing five agency employees spent the day waiting to testify instead of doing their assigned work, in a case where a 25 year government employee who was removed for reasons which are certainly arguable, would have accepted a very reasonable settlement.
In certain forums, if the initiating party wins the case, attorney's fees and costs are paid by the agency. So, in both of these cases a cost benefit analysis would definitely favor settlement. Yet time and time again, agencies will spend thousands and thousands of dollars fighting a case.
That brings me to the second cost of these types of cases. Do we want our government agencies to hammer away at average people, usually employees who don't earn a lot of money? In most cases, each side is not 100% right. Also, employees who work with the employee pursuing the matter, or have worked with them, avidly follow these matters, and quite often retain an attorney because a fellow employee did, or they don't appreciate the firm stance the agency takes against a fellow employee, and become demoralized and unhappy in their work situation.
Therefore, my point is this, and it is a point very popular in politics these days, I feel agencies should operate as businesses, and part of the business decisions they make should be the best way to resolve a matter in which each party leaves with something. This analysis happens daily in private industry and the legal system? I suggest that using the financial might of the Federal Government against its citizens and employees, is not the best way to manage tax dollars and employees.
By: Faye Riva Cohen, Esquire
Law Office of Faye Riva Cohen, P.C.
2047 Locust Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
P: 215-563-7776
F: 215-563-9996
E: frc@fayerivacohen.com
URL: http://www.fayerivacohen.com/
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق