* We obtained a favorable settlement on behalf of a pharmaceutical representative who resigned her job on the West Coast to accept a more favorable position with a different employer in Baltimore County, only to have the new employer rescind its job offer -- after it was too late for her to return to her previous job. The new employer failed to realize that our client did not meet one of their job requirements, but once an employer makes a job offer, and the offeree accepts the offer, the new employer is limited in its ability to rescind a job offer.

* We obtained a large settlement for an administrative assistant in Baltimore County who was subjected to explicit sexual harassment and unwelcome touching by her boss -- a senior executive at a financial services company. When our client complained about the harassment to other senior management, she was told there was nothing that could be done because of his position in the company. After contacting the company, we quickly negotiated a favorable settlement for our client.

* We negotiated a favorable settlement for a package delivery driver in Harford County who was not paid overtime for the time he spent each morning and evening preparing his truck and finalizing paperwork for his employer.

* We obtained a substantial settlement for a computer programmer at a local university in Baltimore who was subjected to disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act and was wrongfully terminated from his job after he refused to provide private medical information to his employer. We prepared our client's charge and filed it for him with the EEOC, assisted our client in his dealings with the EEOC and eventually negotiated a settlement directly with his former employer and the EEOC.

* We successfully represented more than two dozen unemployment claimants in lower appeals hearings and hearings before the Board of Appeals in Baltimore City at the Department of Labor and Licensing.

* We represented more than two dozen clients in negotiating enhanced severance agreements or working out disputes relating to non-competition or non-solicitation agreements with their former employers.

* We obtained a large settlement for a client from Florida who accepted a job offer from a large educational organization in Baltimore, rented a new home in Baltimore, and, while accompanying a moving van with his possessions to Baltimore, was notified that the job offer had been rescinded because the new employer learned that he had previously filed for bankruptcy. While employers can sometimes take such information into account when deciding whether to hire a person for a job, we successfully argued that the employer could not revoke a job offer based on the fact that it learned about the bankruptcy after our client had accepted their job offer.

* We obtained a significant settlement for a client whose employment was terminated in violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") while she was on maternity leave.

* We obtained a significant settlement for an administrative employee of a lobbying organization in Maryland who was unlawfully terminated based on her race.

The second case was filed on behalf of a gentleman who was working as a driver for Federal Express but was not paid any wages or overtime for the time he spent preparing to make deliveries before and after his shift. Then, when he complained to his manager about not being paid, his employment was terminated for no reason.

Finally, we filed a disability discrimination case against the Baltimore City Fire Department on behalf of a young woman who suffers from a rare bone condition that caused one of her legs to be shorter than the other leg. Despite the fact that she walks with a limp, she passed the extremely challenging physical agility test and was hired to be a firefighter. However, shortly before she was to start at the fire academy, she was informed that her hiring had been "a mistake" and therefore her employment was terminated. She later learned that the Fire Chief, when reviewing the new hires in an upper-level management meeting, referred to her as a "cripple" and instructed the human resources director to terminate her employment.

Each of these cases presents its own challenges, both factual and legal, but the diversity of issues and clients shows the breadth of the employment law practice that we are pursing at the Law Office of Andrew M. Dansicker, LLC.

Under Maryland law, it is illegal for an employer to make a "negligent misrepresentation" to a potential employee if the employer knows that the potential employee is likely to rely upon that misrepresentation by quitting their current job, and if the potential employee actually quits his or her current job to his or her detriment. In plain English, if a prospective employer offers you a job, and you tell the employer that you are going to quit your current job, and if you actually quit your current job and then find out that the prospective employer has changed his mind or is no longer willing to hire you, then you can file suit for negligent misrepresentation.

* Claimant was disqualified for gross misconduct for allegedly being a no-call/no-show on two occasions. At the hearing, the employer failed to produce any evidence to refute the claimant's testimony that he had, in fact, called in on both days where he had not come to work in compliance with the employer's policy. The gross misconduct finding was reversed.

* Claimant was disqualified for gross misconduct for allegedly fighting with her manager and walking off the job without permission. At the hearing, the manager admitted that he instigated the fight and began cursing at the claimant, and a coworker admitted giving the claimant permission to leave the job early. The gross misconduct finding was reversed.

* Claimant was disqualified for gross misconduct for allegedly violating the company's lateness policy on three occasions. At the hearing, the claimant proved that he had only been late without permission on two occasions, one of which was a family medical emergency, and the other was only one-minute late. The gross misconduct finding was reversed.

* Claimant was disqualified for voluntary resignation where he submitted his resignation letter after the employer changed his schedule. At the hearing, the claimant proved that the employer was forcing him to work nights thereby leaving him with nobody to watch his children, as his wife's job required her to work nights. The hearing examiner found that the claimant had good cause for resigning and allowed full benefits.

* Claimant was disqualified for allegedly violating company's ethical rules. At the hearing, claimant demonstrated that she was never made aware of the ethical rule that she allegedly violated, nor was she ever warned not to engage in the underlying conduct. The gross misconduct finding was reversed.

Ultimately, while the FMLA poses many obstacles for employees and is seemingly designed to benefit only those employees who have worked for large corporations for more than one year, the FMLA may protect you if you are fired because you are suffering from a serious injury or medical problem or need to care for an immediate family member.

It's never easy to answer that question, but one thing is for sure -- there is no legal requirement, under Maryland law or federal law, that an employer provide an employee with a severance agreement. In fact, many employers provide severance agreements because they want to buy peace with the employee and not have to worry about a potential discrimination charge or lawsuit in the future. That does not mean that the employee actually has a valid legal action -- it just means that the employer does not want to have to worry about any such lawsuit in the future.

Finally, some employers provide severance agreements because they want to maintain a strong reputation in the community and among their employees for treating their employees with respect, even when they fire employees. To that extent, some employers do want to do the right thing, and some employers do genuinely care about their employees and want to soften the blow from an unexpected termination.

When I am contacted by an employee who has just been handed a severance agreement, I have three goals. First, I want to determine if the employee would be giving up a potential legal claim or lawsuit by signing the severance agreement. Have you been paid all commissions and bonuses that you are due? Have you been subjected to discrimination? Second, I want to explain to the employee the pros and cons of signing the agreement, and the legal and practical consequences of each provision in the agreement. Is there a non-compete or confidentiality provision? Are the provisions mutual? Finally, I want to see if there are any points that may be negotiable with the employer that might benefit the employee. Can we negotiate for a larger severance amount? Any additional benefits?

Ultimately, after I consult with you concerning your proposed severance agreement, you may not be able to obtain additional benefits, but you will certainly understand the pros and cons of signing the severance agreement, and you will understand the practical and legal consequences of your decision.

So much do lawyers charge for analyzing proposed severance agreements and consulting with employees about such agreements? I cannot speak for other attorneys, but I usually charge hourly, and I typically will spend between one and three hours reviewing the proposed agreement and consulting with my client, depending upon the complexity of the agreement and whether there are significant negotiations with the employer. Ultimately, such review and consultation usually costs between $225 and $350, although a complicated negotiation may be more expensive.

In the workplace, a standard practice has developed -- employees typically give a two-week notice when resigning, and employers often give a two-week notice when terminating a person's employment. From a legal viewpoint, these standards are arbitrary. An employee can quit without giving any notice, and an employer can fire an employee without giving any notice. There are simply no laws mandating such decorum in the workplace.

An interesting question that sometimes arises is as follows: if an employee gives a two-week notice, and the employer tells the employee not to work the two weeks -- and does not pay the employee for those two weeks -- can the employee file for unemployment compensation, even though the employee resigned (which would normally disqualify an employee from receiving unemployment). While there are no hard and fast rules, Maryland unemployment decisions concerning that issue have generally found that the employee is eligible for unemployment, but only for two weeks. After that date, the employee would not have been working anyway because of the employee's resignation, so any unemployment benefits would cease after the two week period.

So, what should a smart employee do? From a common sense viewpoint, it is never wise to burn bridges, so give a two-week notice. If your employer chooses not to honor that two-week notice, you can always file for unemployment, but even if you don't want to take that route, you will probably be better off leaving an employer on good terms.