Magid & Williams

Title VII, ADEA, ADA, FCRA, and Related Federal and State Laws Prohibit Discrimination The Civil Rights Act of 1964, specifically Title VII, prohibits employers from discriminating on terms or employment conditions based on race, color, nationality, religion, gender, pregnancy, sex, and sex. Although an employee must be able to prove that the company has 15 or more employees, the act covers most organizations. In the U.S., the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) is a federal law that prohibits age discrimination by employers with 20 or more employees and covers employees over 40. Sometimes, a person will have to prove that age discrimination has taken place, either in a case where it is the main issue or one in which age is used as specific evidence of another form of discrimination. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination based on disability, even if someone was able to perform the essential requirements of the job with some accommodation. Many state laws, such as the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA), cover all the factors mentioned in federal law, as well as discrimination based on marital status. Also, employers may not retaliate if an employee or job applicant complains about employment discrimination. Since discrimination is often done in secret and is often based on hidden prejudices, it can be challenging to prove. In some cases, however, an employee can try to show discrimination based on direct evidence or circumstantial evidence. Or both. What is direct evidence? It is evidence that directly proves a fact, without the fact-finder having to make inferences. This could be a statement made by the person who influenced the decision or the one whose decision was challenged that a termination or some other employment decision was made based on a protected factor. Examples include racial slurs, epithets, and insults, any kind of comments showing stereotypical or discriminatory attitudes, direct admissions that they were using these protected factors as a reason for what they did. Circumstantial evidence can be used to show discriminatory motivation in many ways. The most common way to show discriminatory motivation is the so-called "pretext" case. When the reason for a termination, or for the challenged decision, is shown to be pretextual, the fact-finder may conclude that this decision was motivated by an unlawful factor. Evidence of pretext may include evidence of dishonesty in the explanation given by an employer, inconsistent treatment of similar employees or other contradictory indications, and suspicious timing. Magid & Williams represents workers who have been victims of discrimination on account of race, color, nationality, religion, gender, pregnancy, sex, age, disability, or marital status in violation of Title VII, ADEA, ADA, FCRA, FMLA, FLSA, Florida law, and other state and federal laws.HeaderText

The reviews show that Len Magid and his team have highly satisfied clients. They repeatedly underline Magid's professionalism, dedication, and capability in handling labor law matters, portraying him as a brilliant advocate for his clients. Dan's exceptional service and proactive guidance are appreciated, especially those who have worked with him. Attorneys' sympathetic outlook and clients' circumstances frequently solve their issues, seamlessly expressing commitment to the well-being of a client. This kind of teamwork facilitates clients discussing important subjects comfortably and emotionally. The collaborative utilization of all skills and resources serves the client well, providing operative and informative representation. The organization wins cases, clients are happy they achieved their original intention and handled the case effectively. The willingness has various resources dedicated to the resolution. The lawyer tells clients that the current scenario demands solidarity and that the firm has some capacity to solve this condition. For example, successful work sometimes includes making decisions quicker and focusing on the case. It helps the decision-making team develop strategies, focus on the goal and collaborate by educating the client. The importance is that the system works well and successfully to win cases. Clients frequently say that they effectively guided the client's situation during communication because cooperation is one of the fastest ways to achieve the result. Clients should note that the resolution is correct and that they obligate their clients' problem without pressure.