Skip to main content

Employment Rights of N.Y. Army National Guardsman

The Department of Justice today filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia on behalf of Frantz Julien, a New York Army National Guard member, against the Symphony Diagnostic Services Inc., doing business as MobilexUSA (Mobilex), alleging violations of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA).

Subject to certain limitations, USERRA requires that individuals who leave their jobs to serve in the U.S. military be promptly reemployed by their civilian employers in the same positions, or in comparable positions, as the positions that they would have held had they not left to serve in the military. USERRA also requires that civilian employers reemploy returning servicemembers in positions of like pay, status and benefits to the positions the servicemembers would have had if they had been continuously employed by their civilian employers.

The Justice Department’s complaint alleges that Julien, a staff mobile radiologic technologist for Mobilex, was called to active duty in March 2003 and deployed to aid soldiers serving in Operation Enduring Freedom. Upon his completion of active duty in March 2007, Julien began contacting Mobilex to seek reemployment. The complaint alleges Mobilex did not promptly reemploy Julien and only did so in April 2008, after he filed a complaint with the Department of Labor’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS). VETS investigated the matter, determined that Julien’s claim had merit and, upon completion of conciliation efforts, referred the matter to the Justice Department.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...