Some employees act as their own lawyers, something that can put employers at a disadvantage. That’s because courts bend over backward to make sure an unrepresented litigant gets his day in court.
Recent case: Bakarr Bangura sued his former employer over alleged discrimination based on his Senegalese national origin. Using a blank federal form provided to pro se litigants, he checked only the box for suing under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA). His form didn’t make any federal law claims.
The employer got the case dismissed because Bangura hadn’t filed a state discrimination agency complaint before he sued.
But he appealed, and the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. It ordered a trial court to reconsider whether Bangura has a Title VII claim even though he didn’t check that box. (Bangura v. Elwyn, No. 11-4235, 3rd Cir., 2012)
Like what you've read? ...Republish it and share great business tips!
Attention: Readers, Publishers, Editors, Bloggers, Media, Webmasters and more...
We believe great content should be read and passed around. After all, knowledge IS power. And good business can become great with the right information at their fingertips. If you'd like to share any of the insightful articles on BusinessManagementDaily.com, you may republish or syndicate it without charge.
The only thing we ask is that you keep the article exactly as it was written and formatted. You also need to include an attribution statement and link to the article.
" This information is proudly provided by Business Management Daily.com: http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/30817/courts-give-benefit-of-doubt-to-pro-se-plaintiffs "
- Tell supervisors: Enforce attendance rules equally—or prepare for court
- NJLAD gives employees two years from discharge to sue for discrimination
- Congress OKs New Genetic Bias Law—What's it Mean for HR?
- Former worker never should have been hired? You're not off the hook for discrimination
- Would your harassment training pass legal muster? 5 fixes