For example, what is admissible and what is not? What should definitely be admitted? I am a union member involved in a "wrongful termination case and would like to be as prepared as I can for this arbitration hearing. Any advise will highly appreciated.
132626
Bring along your hearing aids.
506383
You could look at the American Bar Associations Model Rules of Professional Responsibility [See link below]. The rules are divided generally by subject and coverage, and make sure to read the Committee Comments for the applicable rules as they given further guidence. \n\nHOWEVER, please note that these rules are only model rules, and may not be the exact rules of your jurisdiction. While many states have adopted the model rules or modifications of the model rules, there are some significant differences depending on jurisdiction. You might look at the State Bar website for your state/jurisdiction and see if they have posted their Rules of Professional Responsibility.
338277
More info required, before even a comment could be offered. Suggest you refer a good attorney, a.s.a.p., like maybe yesterday, so that the statuate of limitations, if applicable in your case does not come into force\n\nst/
400193
There are rules for consciencious objection to being drafted.  Check it out.
32162
One of these days it will be in the mailbox. It will tell you when and where to report. If you need to get out you can ask for a different date, or go and talk to the judge and explain why it would be a hardship for you to serve. The odds of getting out depend on where you live and how difficult it is to get quilified jurors. If you can serve do it and you will probably enjoy the experience.
498500
Hmm, my guess is see if there were any newspaper reports as to when the court hearing will be or to just contact a local court house and ask them how to gain this information.\n\nGood luck!
196248
I should think the way to go about this would be to take a case study from the website of (a) an employer which is currently being threatened or suffering a strike, and (b) the union representing the striking workers.  Once you have both sides of the dispute, check the web site of the local newspaper for the city where the strike is taking place, and you should have a useful essay.  \n\nI had planned to offer our local bus company as an example, but note that all mention of the recent strike has been removed from their site!  Wonder why . . .
364377
First, Normabria (the person who attempted to answer) you do not understand the legal definition of hearsy. It has nothing to do with whether the speaker is present. The definition of hearsay is "an out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted." Hearsay can exist even if all parties are present.\n\nAlso, Jon B, you are only partially correct. Rule 801 (d)(1) would apply only if witness 1's prior inconsistent statement took place in a deposition or some other official proceding, or was consistent with testimony and used to rebut fabrication or motive. In this case rule 801 (d)(1) is inapplicable. \n\n     Now to answer the question, you can trust me because I just took evidence last year.  You can't use 803 (3) because witness 1 did not express his state of mind, emotional, or physical condition. Did witness 1 testify to what he (witness 1) said? If so, the defendant can testify to what witness 1 said to show that witness 1 is lying. Presenting what witness 1 said in this manner would be okay because this would not be hearsay. It would not be offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, it would be offered to show that the witness is lying. In other words, the defense can't offer the testimony as proof that witness 1 was threatening him, as that would be hearsay. But the defense could testify as to what witness 1 said if the testimony helps to show that witness 1 was lying. \n\n     Remember a statement is only hearsay if its offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. If it is not offered for that purpose, than it is admissable. The problem with this question is that I don't know exactly what was said. Hearsay is a funny thing, the line between what is hearsay and what is not can be very thin. \n     Is the defendant invoking an affirmative defense such as "self defense" or something? Since I don't know specifics, its kind of hard to give a more definitive answer.
407156
I am not in a union anymore. I used to belong to the I.A.M. (International association of machinists and aerospace workers). There were monthly dues. I was a senior shop steward for 3 years. I found that the union was a joke. There were no real benefits. When it came to contract time the company gave what they were going to give anyway. What I mean is there were trained attorneys on their side when all the union had were regular working people that had no real education. \n\nMy name is Jim and I am a machinist (25 years).\n\nIf you are thinking of joining or implementing a union look into it very carefully. Talk to people whom they represent and see what they think of that particular union. \n\nPersonally, I would not join a union.
423956
Adjournment procedures vary from place to place and from court to court.  \n\nAs a rule of thumb, you need a very good reason and the other parties consent if the other party isn't the state or the city.  Then you must submit your request to the court or the Judge.\n\nExamples of good reasons are non-refundable airline tickets purchased in advance, final exams on the court date, your job is requiring you to be on a project out of town on that date, your mother's funeral is scheduled for that date, it's your pregnancy due date, your lawyer is scheduled for another trial on the same date as yours, etc ... \n\nIf you have representation, the court will not grant you an adjournment.  It must be done through your attorney.\n\n"why would you be able to legally do that?"   Gosh ... probably because people can't be in two places at the same time.  I submit adjournment requests on behalf of clients every week.  99% of them are granted.
429288
You will be given directions by a representing attorney. If not, you should ask. It is in their best interest that they prepare you prior to the court room!
462255
Have a look on the website for ACAS - it explains exactly how to go through the greivance proceedures and what to say etc.  Good luck and hope you get your money sooner xx
251492
Some of the answers here are truly amazing. My answer is slightly different:\n\n1. The 13th Amendment of the Constitution prohibits involuntary servitude. This means that no one can force you to work for anyone else except after being convicted of a crime. So, ultimately, no matter what sort of contract you may have entered into with an employer -- whether written or oral, you cannot be "forced" to work for that employer for even one moment longer than you wish.\n\nOf course the alternative is that you may be terminated from your employment, but that is the price you pay for not being enslaved -- you are free to leave whenever you wish.\n\n2. Generally, employment contracts that are not specifically written out and agreed to, are in constant flux. That is, if you take lunch today at noon, and your employer retains you upon your return, then your employer has impliedly consented to your taking lunch at noon. If you choose 1PM tomorrow, and your employer continues to retain you, then the employer has impliedly consented to 1PM as being a reasonable lunch.\n\nIf, however, your employer tells you that you can't take lunch at any time other than noon, and you continue to work for the employer, then you have impliedly agreed to only take your lunch at noon.\n\nIf you think about the above example with respect to your question you should see that by your working overtime, you agree to work overtime, and by your refusing to work overtime, if your employer continues to pay you afterwards, then your employer has consented to your not working overtime.\n\nThe bad news, is that the next time your employer asks you to work overtime, if you refuse, and the employer terminates you, then, just as above, you have attempted to counter your employer's most recent offer of employment, and your employer can terminate you for the refusal.\n\nSo, the short version is "no," your employer cannot terminate you for refusing to work overtime, IF the employer continues to retain your services after your refusal. However, if you refuse to work overtime, and the employer terminates you immediately, then your employer can terminate you.\n\nThis all may seem very strange, but it's exactly how a court would analyze the relationship between you and your employer. \n\nGood luck.
223337
The notion that compulsory arbitration completely abridges all appeal rights on any basis is layperson misunderstanding -- it does not.\n\nCompulsory arbitiration means that the parties must substitute a more informal hearing process for the traditional due process of a judicial trial. However, the arbitrator must still permit the parties a meaningful opportunity to appear and present their positions and the arbitrator must make a neutral decision based upon the evidence appearing on the record.\n\nThe objective of compulsory arbitration is to reduce the cost of litigating a dispute -- not to prevent all judicial review.\n\nA court may review a compulsory arbitration award on the basis of mistake of fact, mistake of law, application of law, and abuse of discretion. A court may not substitute its decision for the opinion of the arbitrator, but it may set aside the arbitration award and require the arbitrator to reconsider the matter in view of the facts on the record, and any opinion of the court as to the harmful error made during arbitration.\n\nThe court may also require that the arbitrator more clearly explain its award so that the court can consider the decision based on the facts set forth on the record.\n\nThe above rules generally prevail with regard to a judicially mandated compulsory arbitration.\n\nWhere parties contractually agree to a private arbitration, under the Federal Arbitration Act (Title 9 U.S.C. 1-16 et. seq.), a different standard applies.\n\n"The Federal Arbitration Act allows a federal court to correct a technical error, to strike all or a portion of an award pertaining to an issue not at all subject to arbitration, and to vacate an award that evidences affirmative misconduct in the arbitral process or the final result or that is completely irrational or exhibits a manifest disregard for the law. These grounds afford an extremely limited review authority, a limitation that is designed to preserve due process but not to permit unnecessary public intrusion into private arbitration procedures." Kyocera Corp. v. Prudential-Bache Trade Services, Inc., 341 F.3d 987 (9th Cir. 08/29/2003) \n\nWith regard to the scope of judicial review, "...arbitrators 'exceed their powers' in this regard not when they merely interpret or apply the governing law incorrectly, but when the award is 'completely irrational;' French, 784 F.2d at 906, or exhibits a 'manifest disregard of law,' Todd Shipyards Corp. v. Cunard Line, Ltd., 943 F.2d 1056, 1059-60 (9th Cir. 1991)." Ibid.\n\nThus, courts are only authorized by Congress to undertake a more narrow review of arbitration awards, they are nevertheless still empowered to accord the litigants with a reasoned measure of due process.
431393
Jennifer \n#1 You need to get a lawyer. A corporation cannot represent itself in a judicial proceeding.  \n#2 -- If this was a JUDGMENT, that means that they went through some process and it's enforceable as a matter of law.  Most likely, they filed a lawsuit against you, you didn't respond, so the court entered a "default judgment" for the relief requested by the Court.  This could have happened in Ill. OR in Florida. If the latter, then they have merely filed or registered the judgment in Illinois so that they may collect it. \nDid you ever receive a summons and complaint from these people? Did you ignore it, believing that it would go away?  If so, it will be hard to get the judgment vacated.  You usually need some excuse or good reason to have a judgment vacated (although in Cook County, you may get a sympathetic judge, who wants to adjudicate the merits, who will vacate and set the litigation going). See #1.\n#3 They have already "taken it to court" if, indeed there was a "judgment" filed against you. See #2.  If they merely have filed a complaint seeking judgment, that's a different story, and you have a short amount of time to respond to their allegations.  Get to a lawyer ASAP, otherwise you will be faced with a default judgment.\n#4 -- you won't get good legal advice for this issue here because of the fact-specific nature of your problem (exactly what was filed, the underlying dispute between the parties, etc.) Then you need to think about cost.  How much is the judgment for (or is the Complaint alleging?)? A good lawyer in Chicago will set you back $250.00 an hour at a minimum plus expenses.  If this is something you want to fight, expect $20,000 in fees for litigation at a minimum.  If this is a small matter, expect at least $2,000 in fees to reach an amicable settlement.\n\nThe Illinois State Bar Association should have a referral service on their website if you do not have a lawyer.  If you're willing to pay the going rate ($250.00 for associates, $400-500 for partners) in Chicago, I have some referrals for you.\n\nGood luck.
463712
You'll have to read the fine print in your contract. Your employer may reserve the right to reduce your working hours in certain circumstances. It also depends on the laws where you live.\n\nIf in doubt, go see a lawyer - preferably one familiar with labor law. An initial consultation shouldn't cost you more than $100 - or may even be free - and if your case is valid, they'll work on contingency (which means you don't pay unless you win your suit).
457673
I was an HR Director for about 10 years, although in California and Texas, not Washington. Anyhow, it's been a while, but here goes... Technically you were insubordinate and it is likely that the unemployment officer who officiates over the phone hearing will not believe that you meant anything else by saying d*ck in an e-mail (about someone who I presume is your boss). That said, I am wondering if they actually have your signature on anything that says that you are aware that "they" (your employer) have the right to read and monitor electronic mailings sent by you. Unless they (or you since you were the office manager) are very organized they may have trouble coming up with this paperwork. They need this in order to read your electronic communications and I would bring this up to the officer unless you know for sure that they have it and can easily access it. Also, I am wondering if there is any defense you might have with regards to why you said it or the context in which it was said. Additionally, has there ever been a time that you are aware of when "they" may have set a different precedent by not firing/terming someone based on this sort of insubordination? In other words, where someone else called  a manager a name of sorts, but were either not disciplined or disciplined without termination. I also have to wonder why your employer was able to read this e-mail (did someone show it to him or did you leave your computer on) and why he bothered to log on to your computer if that's what he did? Typically, I wouldn't do this unless I had it in for the person and usually that would mean a series of write ups (I'm a GM/PM now so I still have a number of reports and remember my HR days well). Unfortunately, most companies have a policy saying that they can terminate with no notice based on certain acts, one of which is insubordination. Still, I agree with you that he sounds like a jerk if this is all he had. He would have done better to call you in and find out why you felt like that, thereby trying to find a fix for the situation and gaining your loyalty if he succeeded. Good luck!