Two Legal/Legal-Related Stories you Need to Know

picture of woman and bad cosmeticsThere are many things that are currently happening within the legal realm, some of which you may have heard about while some not. When it comes to law, unless you are an active practicing lawyer, there are things that will for sure pass without you ever noticing that they did. As such, it is of utmost importance, more so if you belong to the class of people who are ever in pursuit of new knowledge, to keep checking with law blogs from time to time as they may be your only source of information regarding to what is currently happening. Additionally, consider subscribing to at least one law blog by signing up for their newsletters; as this will give you unlimited access to their content in a rather expedient way whenever there is something new to share.

This article, however, is determined to give you an insight on two somewhat unique things you need to know. One of them is FDA’s stand on Cosmetics while the second one involves a story of one Jewish nurse (Rebecca Shirrell) lawsuit she filed against her employer (St Francis Med.Ctr) on 7/16/2015 based on claims that her work was terminated on ground that she was Jewish; the plaintiff lost the case.

Religious Discrimination Claim, and when exactly are you Eligible for a claim?

Before we dive into Shirrell’s case, first let us familiarize ourselves with matters that govern religious discrimination claims. Drawing this argument from Title VII, a plaintiff is required to either show direct evidence or create a deduction of discrimination, or reprisal as McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework demands. For those not familiar with McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework is basically a framework that expects one to link the actions done to them or done by them as related to thinks that are attached to them or to the other party. As such, in a case such as Sherrill’s, the employer had a burden of showing that her reasons for terminating Sherrill’s job, were non-discriminatory, and that had nothing to do with the plaintiff’s religion affiliation. The jury ultimately ascertained that the defendant terminated the plaintiff’s work solely based on her breach of contract and not because she was Jewish. Sherrill failed to link her termination to the claims she made against her employer, hence lost the case.

What you all ought to know about religious discrimination claims is that it is not enough to point to an offensive statement as your key evidence of discrimination and anticipate winning, especially, if the action(s) committed to you took months before being committed.

FDA’s Stand on Cosmetics

FDA’s job as many of you know is to inspect and clear drugs and food product after finding them fit for human use and consumption respectively. Cosmetics is generally not drugs, and thus require no monitoring from FDA but recently, FDA has been seen to appear as though they are monitoring them. Before we get down to why FDA is refusing a number of cosmetics products, let’s first get it right with FDA definition of the terms, drug, and cosmetics.

Cosmetics, as described by FDA, are the product specifically designed for the purposes of promoting attractiveness, beautifying, cleansing and/or altering the appearance. A Drug according to the FDA, is a product meant for use in the identification, cure, mitigation, management or prevention of disease, or meant to affect any function or structure of the body.

Therefore the only reason why FDA can reject a cosmetic product is when a drug oriented claim is attached to it, such as healing.

In order to prevent this from occurring manufacturers are advised to be careful when labeling their products and not to under whatsoever circumstances misbrand their product.

For more legal like news, as mentioned earlier, keep visiting law blogs.

Read More

Law About Religious Discrimination in Workplace

image of woman with american flagAs per the law, the employees in the workplace should never go through religious discrimination. It is not just enough for you to go to the court with the claim that you faced religious discrimination in the workplace. There should be proper and solid evidence to support the claim that you made else it will not be a case in the favor of the employees, but rather the case can be for the favor of the employer. The employer may also get some form of taking away with such kind of case. Here are some of the important things that one should know.

There was a case filed by a Jewish nurse that she got terminated from the job because of her religion. She went to court with this claim but the court did not consider her claim but passed the judgement in favor of the employer because she did not submit any solid proof that state that religion was the fact that made the employer terminate her from the job. The nurse went for a higher appeal which also went with the same judgement. It is necessary for submitting evidence as per Title VII which was passed in 1964 as a part of the civil rights act. It is necessary for you to understand the background about going for such a case and things you should do so that the case can be positive for you.
Overview on Religious Discrimination
If you want to bring the fact of religious discrimination in front of the court then it is necessary for you to bring all the evidence as per the law. It is necessary to bring to light some direct evidence that can prove that there was religious discrimination happening with the person according to the McDonnell- Douglas burden shifting- framework. If there are no direct evidence them the employee needs to show some non-discriminatory or legitimate reason which can challenge the action.
The framework is the one that is followed by the court while handling such kind of the cases. The court found out that the nurse failed in meeting with her obligations under the framework. She was unable to prove that she was facing any religious discrimination in the workplace. She pointed out a remark of her co-worker which was anti-jewish in its voice, but she could not prove her termination was something as a continuation of it. She was terminated 3 months after the remarks was made and the termination happened because of the accumulation of too many disciplinary complaints against that person within about 12 months. The case failed because she was unable to prove that any non-Jewish employees in the medical center got better treatment from management. There was no proper evidence to state that her termination was due to the religion in which she belongs.
Take Always for Religious Discrimination
Many of the cases when the cases were filed against the employers for religious discrimination, they presented well-documented policies in the workplace and the poor performance of employees. These factors helped them in making the case go against them.

Read More