Category Archives: WV Human Rights Act

The West Virginia Human Rights Act has moved!

This is real­ly just a heads up to oth­er attor­neys. I am still see­ing a lot of lawyers incor­rect­ly cite the West Vir­ginia Human Rights Act to its pri­or location.

The West Vir­ginia had been orig­i­nal­ly cod­i­fied at § 5–11‑1.

Because of the West Vir­ginia leg­is­la­ture reor­ga­niz­ing last year var­i­ous part of the West Vir­ginia Code, the Human Rights Ac t has been relo­cat­ed to W. Va. Code § 16B-17–1.

A bit of detail (prob­a­bly more than you want):

Con­tin­ue read­ing The West Vir­ginia Human Rights Act has moved!

Understanding “Constructive Discharge” in Employment Law—When Quitting Is Really Getting Fired

Intro­duc­tion
Most peo­ple think of get­ting fired as a clear-cut event—your boss calls you into the office, maybe there’s a stern con­ver­sa­tion, and you’re sent pack­ing. But not every ter­mi­na­tion is that explic­it. Some­times, the work­ing con­di­tions get so bad that an employ­ee feels they have no real choice but to quit. That’s where the legal con­cept of con­struc­tive dis­charge comes into play.

In West Vir­ginia (and under fed­er­al law), con­struc­tive dis­charge is tech­ni­cal­ly not a self-suf­fi­cient legal claim. Con­struc­tive dis­charge is a legal doc­trine for deter­min­ing whether a res­ig­na­tion will be treat­ed as a dis­charge, so that the con­struc­tive­ly dis­charged employ­ee is treat­ed as hav­ing been invol­un­tar­i­ly sep­a­rat­ed (ter­mi­nat­ed, fired). If an employ­ee’s res­ig­na­tion is tru­ly vol­un­tary, then there is no “wrong­ful dis­charge,” and the employ­er is not legal­ly respon­si­ble for the employ­ee’s finan­cial harm after the res­ig­na­tion. But if the res­ig­na­tion is treat­ed as a con­struc­tive dis­charge, the employ­ee may have a viable wrong­ful dis­charge claim, and may have recov­er­able dam­ages for the finan­cial harm expe­ri­enced after the dis­charge. But the con­struc­tive dis­charge itself is not inde­pen­dent­ly “actionable”–it must be cou­pled with a legal the­o­ry such as sex dis­crim­i­na­tion or retal­i­a­tion for whistleblowing.

Con­tin­ue read­ing Under­stand­ing “Con­struc­tive Dis­charge” in Employ­ment Law—When Quit­ting Is Real­ly Get­ting Fired

The Evolving Standard for Hostile Work Environment Claims

When employ­ees say their work­place is “tox­ic” or “hos­tile,” they’re often using the term loosely—maybe it’s office dra­ma, an annoy­ing boss, or just a gen­er­al­ly tense atmos­phere. But in employ­ment law, a hos­tile work envi­ron­ment has a very spe­cif­ic legal mean­ing. And as courts have refined the stan­dard over the years, the line between what’s action­able and what’s just unpleas­ant has got­ten sharp­er (but not nec­es­sar­i­ly clearer).

For both employ­ers and employ­ees in West Vir­ginia, it’s impor­tant to under­stand what actu­al­ly qual­i­fies as a hos­tile work envi­ron­ment under the law, how these claims are proven, and what the poten­tial pit­falls are in lit­i­ga­tion. Spoil­er alert: just being a jerk isn’t nec­es­sar­i­ly illegal.


What Is a Hostile Work Environment?

Under both fed­er­al law and West Vir­ginia law, a hos­tile work envi­ron­ment occurs when an employ­ee is sub­ject­ed to dis­crim­i­na­to­ry harass­ment that is severe or per­va­sive enough to alter the con­di­tions of employ­ment and cre­ate an abu­sive work­ing environment.

Con­tin­ue read­ing The Evolv­ing Stan­dard for Hos­tile Work Envi­ron­ment Claims

At-Will” Employment in West Virginia: What It Really Means (and What It Doesn’t)

Most folks in West Virginia—employers and employ­ees alike—have heard the phrase “at-will employ­ment.” It gets tossed around a lot, espe­cial­ly when someone’s been fired and is try­ing to fig­ure out if it was legal. But like a lot of legal phras­es, “at-will” means more (and some­times less) than peo­ple assume.

In this arti­cle, we’re going to take a clear-eyed look at what at-will employ­ment actu­al­ly means under West Vir­ginia law, the key excep­tions to it, and how courts treat wrong­ful dis­charge claims. Whether you’re run­ning a busi­ness or advis­ing a work­er, under­stand­ing these rules is cru­cial to avoid­ing (or pur­su­ing) a lawsuit.


The Basic Rule: At-Will Employment Means Either Side Can Walk

The gen­er­al rule in West Virginia—and most oth­er states—is that employ­ment is pre­sumed to be at-will. That means an employ­er can ter­mi­nate an employ­ee for any rea­son, no rea­son, or even a bad rea­son, just not an ille­gal one. Sim­i­lar­ly, employ­ees can quit at any time with­out notice or explanation.

This doc­trine has been around for­ev­er. It’s ground­ed in com­mon law prin­ci­ples and rein­forced by state court deci­sions. But, as always, the dev­il is in the details.

Con­tin­ue read­ing At-Will” Employ­ment in West Vir­ginia: What It Real­ly Means (and What It Doesn’t)

Understanding Joint Employment Under Federal and West Virginia Law

If you work in health­care, hos­pi­tal­i­ty, or any indus­try that relies on staffing agen­cies, fran­chise mod­els, or shared employ­ment struc­tures, you’ve like­ly encoun­tered the con­cept of joint employ­ment. But what does it actu­al­ly mean? And more impor­tant­ly, how could it affect you or your clients?

Joint employ­ment occurs when mul­ti­ple entities—like a com­pa­ny and a staffing agency, or a fran­chisor and a franchisee—share con­trol over an employee’s work. That shared con­trol can lead to shared lia­bil­i­ty, espe­cial­ly in wage-and-hour dis­putes, dis­crim­i­na­tion claims, and union mat­ters. With recent changes to fed­er­al rules and ongo­ing court deci­sions, under­stand­ing joint employ­ment has nev­er been more important.


What Is Joint Employment?

Sim­ply put, joint employ­ment hap­pens when two or more enti­ties have sig­nif­i­cant con­trol over the terms and con­di­tions of a worker’s job. That could include con­trol over sched­ules, pay rates, hir­ing, fir­ing, or dai­ly super­vi­sion. For legal pur­pos­es, both enti­ties may be con­sid­ered “employ­ers,” mean­ing they’re both respon­si­ble for com­ply­ing with employ­ment laws.

Con­tin­ue read­ing Under­stand­ing Joint Employ­ment Under Fed­er­al and West Vir­ginia Law

Understanding the Interactive Process Under the ADA: A Two-Way Street

Let’s talk about a con­cept in employ­ment law that often gets over­looked or misunderstood—the “inter­ac­tive process” under the Amer­i­cans with Dis­abil­i­ties Act (ADA). If you rep­re­sent employ­ers or employ­ees, or you’re an HR pro­fes­sion­al nav­i­gat­ing accom­mo­da­tion requests, this process is absolute­ly cen­tral to ADA compliance.

It’s also one of the more com­mon areas where employ­ers get tripped up—not nec­es­sar­i­ly by refus­ing to accom­mo­date a dis­abil­i­ty, but by fail­ing to com­mu­ni­cate prop­er­ly and in good faith.

What is the Interactive Process?

Under the ADA, once an employ­er becomes aware that an employ­ee needs an accom­mo­da­tion for a dis­abil­i­ty, the law requires the employ­er to engage in an “inter­ac­tive process” with the employ­ee to iden­ti­fy a rea­son­able accom­mo­da­tion. The statu­to­ry basis is 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(5)(A), which defines dis­crim­i­na­tion to include not mak­ing “rea­son­able accom­mo­da­tions to the known phys­i­cal or men­tal lim­i­ta­tions of an oth­er­wise qual­i­fied indi­vid­ual with a dis­abil­i­ty,” unless the employ­er can show undue hardship.

The Equal Employ­ment Oppor­tu­ni­ty Com­mis­sion (EEOC) explains that this is not a one-time conversation—it’s a col­lab­o­ra­tive dia­logue aimed at iden­ti­fy­ing and imple­ment­ing accom­mo­da­tions that allow the employ­ee to per­form the essen­tial func­tions of their job.\

The gov­ern­ing reg­u­la­tion, 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(o)(3), puts it this way:

Con­tin­ue read­ing Under­stand­ing the Inter­ac­tive Process Under the ADA: A Two-Way Street

Workplace Disability Discrimination: Understanding Rights and Employer Obligations

Dis­abil­i­ty dis­crim­i­na­tion in the work­place is an issue that affects both employ­ees and employ­ers. With the Amer­i­cans with Dis­abil­i­ties Act (ADA) set­ting the legal frame­work, busi­ness­es must nav­i­gate rea­son­able accom­mo­da­tions while ensur­ing com­pli­ance. Employ­ees, on the oth­er hand, need to under­stand their rights and what steps to take if they expe­ri­ence dis­crim­i­na­tion. Let’s break it down.

What Is Disability Discrimination?

Dis­abil­i­ty dis­crim­i­na­tion occurs when an employ­er treats an employ­ee or job appli­cant unfa­vor­ably because of a dis­abil­i­ty. This can include:

  • Refus­ing to hire a qual­i­fied appli­cant due to a disability.
  • Fail­ing to pro­vide rea­son­able accom­mo­da­tions that would enable an employ­ee to per­form essen­tial job functions.
  • Wrong­ful­ly ter­mi­nat­ing or demot­ing an employ­ee based on their disability.
  • Harass­ing an employ­ee due to their dis­abil­i­ty or med­ical condition.

The ADA (42 U.S.C. § 12112) pro­hibits dis­crim­i­na­tion against qual­i­fied indi­vid­u­als with dis­abil­i­ties in all aspects of employ­ment, includ­ing hir­ing, fir­ing, pro­mo­tions, and job assignments.

Con­tin­ue read­ing Work­place Dis­abil­i­ty Dis­crim­i­na­tion: Under­stand­ing Rights and Employ­er Oblig­a­tions

The Roles of the EEOC and the West Virginia Human Rights Commission in Workplace Discrimination Claims

Work­place dis­crim­i­na­tion is a seri­ous issue, and employ­ees who believe they’ve been treat­ed unfair­ly often turn to the Equal Employ­ment Oppor­tu­ni­ty Com­mis­sion (“EEOC”) or the West Vir­ginia Human Rights Com­mis­sion (“HRC”) for help. But what exact­ly do the EEOC and HRC do, and how does the com­plaint process work? Whether you’re an employ­er try­ing to stay com­pli­ant or an employ­ee con­sid­er­ing fil­ing a claim, it is impor­tant to under­stand the EEOC’s and HRC’s roles.

What Is the EEOC?

The EEOC is the fed­er­al agency respon­si­ble for enforc­ing anti-dis­crim­i­na­tion laws in the work­place. It inves­ti­gates com­plaints of dis­crim­i­na­tion based on race, sex, age, dis­abil­i­ty, nation­al ori­gin, reli­gion, and oth­er pro­tect­ed char­ac­ter­is­tics under laws like:

  • Title VII of the Civ­il Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e‑2)
  • The Age Dis­crim­i­na­tion in Employ­ment Act (ADEA) (29 U.S.C. § 623)
  • The Amer­i­cans with Dis­abil­i­ties Act (ADA) (42 U.S.C. § 12112)

The agency also enforces laws pro­hibit­ing retal­i­a­tion, mean­ing an employ­er can’t pun­ish an employ­ee for fil­ing a com­plaint or par­tic­i­pat­ing in an investigation.

Con­tin­ue read­ing The Roles of the EEOC and the West Vir­ginia Human Rights Com­mis­sion in Work­place Dis­crim­i­na­tion Claims

Workplace Harassment: What Employers and Employees Need to Know

Work­place harass­ment is a seri­ous issue that can lead to legal trou­ble for employ­ers and cre­ate a tox­ic work envi­ron­ment for employ­ees. While most peo­ple think of harass­ment in terms of sex­u­al mis­con­duct, the law cov­ers a much broad­er range of behav­iors. Under­stand­ing what con­sti­tutes work­place harass­ment and how to han­dle it is cru­cial for both employ­ers and employees.

What Is Workplace Harassment?

Harass­ment is defined as unwel­come con­duct based on race, col­or, reli­gion, sex (includ­ing preg­nan­cy, gen­der iden­ti­ty, and sex­u­al ori­en­ta­tion), nation­al ori­gin, age (40 or old­er), dis­abil­i­ty, or genet­ic infor­ma­tion (42 U.S.C. §2000e‑2(a)). It becomes ille­gal when:

  • Endur­ing the offen­sive con­duct becomes a con­di­tion of con­tin­ued employ­ment, or
  • The con­duct is severe or per­va­sive enough to cre­ate a hos­tile work envi­ron­ment (Mer­i­tor Sav. Bank v. Vin­son, 477 U.S. 57 (1986)).

Harass­ment isn’t just about inap­pro­pri­ate jokes or unwant­ed advances—it can include threats, intim­i­da­tion, offen­sive images, or even work­place poli­cies that dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly affect cer­tain groups.

Con­tin­ue read­ing Work­place Harass­ment: What Employ­ers and Employ­ees Need to Know

Wrongful Termination: What It Is and What It Isn’t

Los­ing a job is tough, but not every ter­mi­na­tion is ille­gal. The term “wrong­ful ter­mi­na­tion” gets thrown around a lot, but in legal terms, it has a spe­cif­ic mean­ing. Both employ­ers and employ­ees need to under­stand what actu­al­ly qual­i­fies as wrong­ful ter­mi­na­tion under fed­er­al and West Vir­ginia law.

What Is Wrongful Termination?

Wrong­ful ter­mi­na­tion hap­pens when an employ­er fires an employ­ee in vio­la­tion of a law, con­tract, or pub­lic pol­i­cy. This can include:

  • Dis­crim­i­na­tion: Fir­ing some­one based on race, gen­der, age, dis­abil­i­ty, or oth­er pro­tect­ed char­ac­ter­is­tics vio­lates fed­er­al and state anti-dis­crim­i­na­tion laws (42 U.S.C. §2000e‑2; W. Va. Code §16B-17–9).
  • Retal­i­a­tion: Employ­ers can’t fire an employ­ee for report­ing dis­crim­i­na­tion, work­place safe­ty vio­la­tions, or engag­ing in oth­er pro­tect­ed activ­i­ties (42 U.S.C. 2000e‑3(a); W. Va. Code §16B-17–9(7)).
  • Breach of con­tract: If an employ­ee has a writ­ten con­tract or even an implied con­tract promis­ing job secu­ri­ty, a ter­mi­na­tion out­side the agreed terms may be wrong­ful (Cook v. Heck’s Inc., 342 S.E.2d 453 (W. Va. 1986)).
  • Pub­lic pol­i­cy vio­la­tions: Employ­ers can’t fire employ­ees for rea­sons that vio­late pub­lic pol­i­cy, such as refus­ing to engage in ille­gal activ­i­ties (Har­less v. First Nat’l Bank, 246 S.E.2d 270 (W. Va. 1978)).
Con­tin­ue read­ing Wrong­ful Ter­mi­na­tion: What It Is and What It Isn’t