Employment discrimination in the workplace - Pennsylvania

Jan 01, 2024

Employment discrimination is a serious issue that affects many workers in Pennsylvania. If you believe you have been discriminated against in the workplace, you may be entitled to file a claim. The process of bringing an employment discrimination claim in Pennsylvania can be complex, but with the right information and guidance, you can navigate it successfully. In this blog post, we will discuss the steps involved in bringing an employment discrimination claim in Pennsylvania.

Step 1: Understand the Different Types of Employment Discrimination

Before you can bring a claim for employment discrimination, it is important to understand what constitutes discrimination in the workplace. Under Pennsylvania law, it is illegal for employers to discriminate against employees on the basis of their race, color, national origin, sex, religion, disability, age (40 years and older), or genetic information. Discrimination can take many forms, including:

  • Refusing to hire, promote, or train an employee because of their protected status.
  • Paying an employee less than other employees doing similar work because of their protected status.
  • Firing or laying off an employee because of their protected status.
  • Harassing an employee because of their protected status.
  • Failing to provide reasonable accommodations to an employee with a disability.

If you have experienced any of these forms of discrimination in the workplace, you may have grounds for a claim.

Step 2: File a Charge with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Before you can file a lawsuit for employment discrimination in Pennsylvania, you must first file a charge with either the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC) or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The PHRC is a state agency that handles discrimination claims in Pennsylvania, while the EEOC is a federal agency that handles claims under federal law.

To file a charge with either agency, you must complete a form that provides details about the discrimination you experienced, including when it occurred, who was involved, and how it affected you. You must file your charge within 180 days of the discriminatory act, or within 300 days if the discrimination occurred in a place with its own state or local anti-discrimination law. Once your charge is filed, the agency will investigate the matter and may attempt to mediate a settlement between you and your employer.

Step 3: Consider Mediation

In some cases, the PHRC or the EEOC may offer mediation as an option for resolving your discrimination claim. Mediation is a process in which a neutral third party works with you and your employer to try to reach a mutually acceptable resolution. Mediation can be a faster and less expensive way to resolve your claim than going to court, but it is not always successful.

Step 4: File a Lawsuit

If mediation is unsuccessful, or if you choose not to pursue it, you may file a lawsuit against your employer. To file a lawsuit for employment discrimination in Pennsylvania, you must first obtain a right-to-sue letter from the PHRC or the EEOC. This letter gives you permission to file a lawsuit in court.

In your lawsuit, you must prove that your employer engaged in discriminatory behavior and that this behavior harmed you in some way, such as by causing you to lose your job or suffer emotional distress. You may also be entitled to damages, such as lost wages, emotional distress, and punitive damages.

Step 5: Seek Legal Representation

Bringing an employment discrimination claim in Pennsylvania can be a complicated and time-consuming process. To give yourself the best chance of success, it is important to seek the assistance of an experienced employment discrimination attorney. An attorney like J. Chadwick Schnee, Esq. can help you navigate the legal system, gather evidence, and present your case in the most effective way possible.

In conclusion, if you have experienced employment discrimination in Pennsylvania, you have legal rights and options. If you need to find a discrimination lawyer near you, Contact attorney Schnee at 717.400.5955 or chadwick@schneelegal.com to learn more.

Post-trial motions not required in Right-to-Know Law enforcement

By J. CHADWICK SCHNEE, ESQ. • 01 Mar, 2024
As a matter of first impression, a Commonwealth Court judge has ruled that post-trial motions under Pa. R.Civ.P. 227.1 are not required in an appeal from an order in a Right-to-Know Law enforcement action. In Walker v. County of Bucks, a requester filed an enforcement action against an agency and its open-records officer where the agency had filed two appeals of the same OOR final order (rather than two appeals of two different OOR final orders), arguing that relief in mandamus was appropriate because one of the two OOR final orders was not appealed.[1] The trial court rejected the complaint, holding that relief in mandamus “is not clear at this time” due to a pending motion to substitute one its appeals.[2] The requester appealed but did not file post-trial motions. The agency argued that, under Pa.R.Civ.P. 227.1, the requester “waived all issues on appeal and her appeal must be dismissed” because she did not file post-trial motions. Commonwealth Court Judge Dumas disagreed, holding that a RTKL enforcement action “is not a situation where post-trial motions had to be filed” because the complaint in mandamus was covered by “‘petition practice’” as set forth under the Note to Pa R.A.P. 3761.[3] Instead, “it is evident that the mandamus action filed by Appellant was in petition practice, such that post-trial motions were not necessary.”[4] While this is an unreported memorandum opinion of a single member of the Commonwealth Court, parties to a RTKL enforcement action potentially may not be required to file post-trial motions in order to preserve issues on appeal. (This post should not be considered legal advice. For more information or to discuss, Attorney Schnee can be reached at chadwick@schneelegal.com ). [1] Walker v. County of Bucks, 974 C.D. 2023 (Pa.Cmwlth. Jan. 31, 2024) (Dumas, J.) (unreported). The author represents the requester in this matter. [2] Id. [3]The Note provides Pa.R.A.P. 3761(b) provides the method for seeking compliance with a final determination of the Office of Open Records in the Commonwealth Court. This differs from proceeding in the courts of common pleas, where the method to obtain judicial review of alleged failure to comply with a final determination of the Office of Open Records may be an action in mandamus or other petition authorized by local rule. Capinski v. Upper Pottsgrove Township, 164 A.3d 601 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2017). Use of this petition is appropriate when the final determination was not appealed. If an appeal was taken and the order affirmed by the Commonwealth Court, enforcement is not of the final determination of the Office of Open Records, but rather of the order of the Commonwealth Court. [4] Walker v. County of Bucks, 974 C.D. 2023 (Pa.Cmwlth. Jan. 31, 2024) (Dumas, J.) (unreported).

Court rules agency violated Sunshine Act in amending agenda

By J. Chadwick Schnee, Esq. • 01 Feb, 2024
The Pennsylvania Commonwealth issued a ruling on November 8, 2023 holding that an agency violated open meeting laws when it added the consideration of a collective bargaining agreement with its teachers union without first providing public notice. The case, brought by now-Senator Jarrett Coleman, alleged that the Parkland School District violated the Sunshine Act when it voted to approve a multi-year collective bargaining agreement with its teachers union when that item was not previously listed as part of a public agenda. In other words, the public had no prior notice that the collective bargaining agreement would be considered unless they happened to attend the public meeting. The case concerned 2021 amendments to the Sunshine Act that, until now, had never previously been interpreted by an appellate court. Specifically, this section, Section 712.1, provides as follows: (a) Official action.--Except as provided in subsection (b), (c), (d) or (e), an agency may not take official action on a matter of agency
Share by: