Facing Covid Mandates at Work. Legal analysis with Attorney Andrew Lieb.

Vaccines vs. Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs - First Round Goes to Religion

The Federal Court for the Northern District of New York has enjoined vaccine mandates based upon sincerely held religious beliefs by way of issuing a Temporary Restraining Order in the case of Dr. A v. Hochul.  

Here is how the plaintiffs' argued that the vaccine violate their sincerely held religious beliefs - "vaccines [] were tested, developed or produced with fetal cells line derived from procured abortions." According to the plaintiffs:

 Johnson & Johnson/Janssen: Fetal cell cultures are used to produce and manufacture the J&J COVID-19 vaccine and the final formulation of this vaccine includes residual amounts of the fetal host cell proteins (≤0.15 mcg) and/or host cell DNA (≤3 ng).

 Pfizer/BioNTech: The HEK-293 abortion-related cell line was used in research related to the development of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.

 Moderna/NIAID: Aborted fetal cell lines were used in both the development and testing of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine.

Further, plaintiffs religious beliefs are that they "oppose abortion under any circumstances, as they believe that abortion is the intrinsically evil killing of an innocent" and follow "spiritual leaders... who urge Christians to refuse said vaccines to avoid cooperation in abortion and to bear witness against it without compromise" and finally, their "religious conviction [is] against involuntary or coerced vaccination as an invasion of bodily autonomy contrary to their religious beliefs."

To be clear, the case is far from over with the next court deadline for the defendants to respond being set at September 22, 2021 at 5pm. As of this moment, no preliminary injunction or permanent injunction has been ordered. At this stage, the court has merely granted a temporary restraining order, which prohibits the denial of "religious exemptions from COVID-19 vaccination" until round two of the case.

However, if you are the type of person who has a sincerely held religious belief against vaccination, you should use this case as your blueprint to request an accommodation.

 

 

The Fight to Stop Source of Income Discrimination in NYC

NYC Council has enacted local law 1339-2019, which amends Title 21 of the NYC Administrative Code by adding section 21-142, requiring the DSS to provide CityFHEPS (a rental assistance program designed to help individuals and families find and keep housing) applicants with written notice about source of income discrimination at the time an applicant receives a shopping letter from the DSS. 

The notice would provide information about protections under the NYC Human Rights Law related to source of income discrimination.  

The notice will provide the following: 

• Examples of phrases that may indicate discrimination based on lawful source of income.
• A statement that it is illegal for landlords, brokers, and other housing agents to request additional payments for rent, security deposit, or broker's fee because an individual receives rental assistance.
• A statement that it is illegal for landlords, brokers, and other housing agents to publish any type of advertisement that indicates a refusal to accept rental assistance.
• A statement that an individual has a right to be free from discriminatory, harassing, or threatening behavior or comments based on individuals' receipt of rental assistance. 
• Contact information for the department's source of income discrimination unit.

Clearly, this local law significantly stops landlords from discriminating against prospective or existing tenants that qualify for source of income under the CityFHEPS program. On the flip side of the coin, the law undoubtedly benefits those receiving source of income from the CityFHEPS program and prospective tenant applicants of the CityFHEPS program, by greatly reducing the likelihood of landlord discrimination based on source of income, while also providing a method to report any future source of income discrimination. 

What's missing is that CityFHEPS recipients should know that they can file suit and get their attorneys' fees paid if they are victims of discrimination. While the BYC Council has made it clear that source of income discrimination will not be tolerable on any level, are landlords prepared to avoid claims of discrimination?  

Landlords - what are you doing to enact policies so your teams don't discriminate? 

NY Legal Podcast Does In-depth Analysis On Why Landlords Statewide Can Evict Tenants Even With The Eviction Ban

"The Lieb Cast" (a New York based legal podcast hosted by Attorney Andrew Lieb and Lauren Lieb) has featured an entire episode devoted to New York's eviction moratorium (which gives landlords options to pursue evictions or get paid through governmental rent relief). "The Lieb Cast" discusses why landlords can still sue for a money judgment in supreme court. In addition, the podcast explores residential and commercial distinctions for evictions, plus the foreclosure moratoriums in New York.

"NYS landlords can and should file evictions. The new moratorium does not totally prevent evictions and if you file, you will either be able to proceed with the eviction or your tenant will be directed by the court to get government money to pay your rent". Said Andrew Lieb, Co-Host of The Lieb Cast.

 

Podcast Link: https://www.listentolieb.com/876124/9130411-ny-landlords-can-evict-tenants-even-with-the-eviction-ban-here-is-what-you-need-to-know

About The Lieb Cast

Business success takes hard work, but physical hustle can only get you so far. You also need to work out your mind to succeed today. Join Andrew Lieb's weekly podcast to explore how current events impact your business and real estate holdings. This podcast is for business owners and managers who want to stay up to date with the latest legislation and regulations that will impact their business. Learn how to navigate these laws to avoid getting sued, grow and market your business, manage employees, and strategize to dominate our ever-changing business world.

Andrew Lieb is a litigator, corporate trainer, author, real estate school owner, and entrepreneur. He is joined on the air by Lauren Lieb, his wife and business partner, to present this educational and personal podcast. They coach their listeners to business greatness and entertain you with a ton of fun, sarcasm, wit, and banter. Search "Lieb Cast" on any podcast player.

New Legislation - Shared Work Program Gives Employers Flexibility to Avoid Layoffs

Struggling employers can reduce their employee's hours and those employees can offset their lost wages with unemployment insurance (UI) under the Shared Work Program, which now offers even more flexibility thanks to S.4049, which Governor Hochul signed on Labor Day (9/6/21).

The Shared Work Program provides employers with an alternative to laying off workers during business struggles by allowing employees to receive partial UI benefits while working reduced hours. 

Previously, under the Shared Work Program, employees could only collect partial UI benefits for up to 26 straight weeks, regardless of what their maximum benefit entitlement is under UI. 

Now, the new legislation changes the cap on shared work benefits from 26 straight weeks to an amount of time equal to 26 weeks' worth of benefits. In other words, employees can now collect UI benefits until they have reached their maximum benefit amount under UI. 

This change will ultimately extend the length of time a worker will receive benefits under the Shared Work Program.

According to Gov. Hochul, "these bills [workforce legislation package] will ensure that workers receive fair wages, benefits, and are kept safe in their work places." 

How big of an impact do you think this new legislation will have on workers and employers going forward?