Verdicts

Pachter v. Bernard Hodes Group Inc., 06-3344-cv, 2nd Cir., Sept. 5, 2008

The plaintiff was an account representative for the defendant recruitment and staffing company. Holding a title of Vice President, Management Supervisor, her compensation took the form of commissions based on monthly billings. The defendant employer subjected her commissions to deductions ' that the district court, in plaintiff's challenge to their legality ' held violated New York's Labor Law. The court entered judgment for the plaintiff. The appellate court reversed, remanded, and ordered dismissal. New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, determined that absent a governing document, the parties' express or implied agreement governs when a commission is “earned” and becomes a “wage” for Labor Law Article 6 purposes. The plaintiff's cause of action failed because it was undisputed that she knowingly acquiesced, over several years, to her employer's approach in calculating her commissions. That conduct constituted an implied agreement between the parties.

Failure to File Timely EEOC Discrimination Claim Leads to Dismissal of Suit

Alleyne v. American Airlines, No. 07-1386-cv, 2nd Cir., Nov. 20, 2008. Plaintiff, who is black, was a service clerk with American Airlines Inc. In March 2002, under a provision in American's bargaining pact with Local 501 of the Transport Workers Union of America, his seniority was forfeited after 323 hours' work as a Management Personnel Replacement. He was fired in June 2003 after a workforce reduction, and, as a result, lost his seniority. In March 2004, he filed a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which granted permission to sue. The appellate court affirmed a district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's employment discrimination suit for failure to file a discrimination charge with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment action. Discussing Delaware State College v. Ricks, the panel agreed with the court that the plaintiff's discrimination claim accrued, for statute of limitations purposes, on the date that he learned of his allegedly discriminatory loss of seniority, not the later date of his employment's termination.

Employee's Conduct Constituted an Implied Agreement To Her Employer's Calculation of Commissions

Pachter v. Bernard Hodes Group Inc., 06-3344-cv, 2nd Cir., Sept. 5, 2008

The plaintiff was an account representative for the defendant recruitment and staffing company. Holding a title of Vice President, Management Supervisor, her compensation took the form of commissions based on monthly billings. The defendant employer subjected her commissions to deductions ' that the district court, in plaintiff's challenge to their legality ' held violated New York's Labor Law. The court entered judgment for the plaintiff. The appellate court reversed, remanded, and ordered dismissal. New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, determined that absent a governing document, the parties' express or implied agreement governs when a commission is “earned” and becomes a “wage” for Labor Law Article 6 purposes. The plaintiff's cause of action failed because it was undisputed that she knowingly acquiesced, over several years, to her employer's approach in calculating her commissions. That conduct constituted an implied agreement between the parties.