Our Videos

February 4, 10

NEWS / Justice Department Settles Lawsuit Against MasTec Advanced Technologies to Enforce the Employment Ri


WASHINGTON — The Justice Department announced today that it has reached a settlement in its lawsuit against MasTec Advanced Technologies on behalf of Eugene C. Burress, a U.S. Army Reserve member, alleging that MasTec willfully violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA).

The settlement, embodied in a consent decree that must still be approved in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, calls for MasTec to provide Burress with $5,760 in backpay and interest.

The Justice Department’s complaint, filed in November 2009, alleges that in January 2008, Burress, then a field technician supervisor at MasTec’s Martinsburg, W.Va., office, was called to active duty in the U.S. Army and notified his supervisor of his upcoming military service. His supervisor previously had informed Burress that the site manager position at the office would be vacant soon and offered the position to Burress when it became available. Burress accepted. However, in October 2008, while Burress was engaged in military service, MasTec promoted another MasTec employee to site manager. Burress filed a complaint with the Labor Department’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service, which investigated and attempted to resolve Burress’s USERRA complaint before referring it to the Justice Department for litigation.

"Members of our military make great sacrifices on behalf of our nation. Upon their return from active duty, they have the right to know they will not be denied a promotion because of their service," said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.

USERRA prohibits civilian employers from denying servicemembers promotions because of their membership in or obligations to perform service in the U.S. military, and also requires that servicemembers who leave their jobs to serve in the U.S. military be timely reemployed by their civilian employers in the same position, or in a comparable position to the position that they would have held had they not left to serve in the military.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/February/10-crt-126.html

 




Testimonials

John Beacleay

Just wanted to say thanks again for all your help Anton. I mean it's really amazing to me that yo...
Read More »
Niranjan Sujay
I recently used LOGOS INTERNATIONAL for the translation of my bachelor’s certificate, and I couldn’t...
Read More »
Katia Nagata

As a foreigner, I needed a certified translation, so I called the DOE to give me a list of the ce...
Read More »
AnnaMaria Realbuto
Thank you for all your assistance and efficiency...
Read More »




FAQ

May I complete certificate wording in blue ink or do I have to use black?
Read More »
What were the prior cap-gap regulations for F-1 students?
Read More »
IS THERE A TREATY AUTHORITY PERMITTING CONSULAR OFFICERS TO PERFORM NOTARIAL AND AUTHENTICATION SERVICES ABROAD?
Read More »
My fiance (fiancee) has been denied a B1/B2 visitor visa to the U.S. before. Could that affect the decision on her K-1 visa application if I file a K-1 Fiance (e) visa petition for her now?
Read More »






News

November 11, 25
US Supreme Court allows State Department to limit passport sex to birth certificate gender marker
Read More »
November 5, 25
Clerical error on birth certificate prevents Arizona teen from joining school’s male basketball team
Read More »
October 29, 25
Florida violinist arrested for smashing pumpkins
Read More »
October 27, 25
Scammers exploit LastPass “digital will” function by referencing phony death certificate
Read More »