Adam T. Klein

Lewis Steel and Adam T. Klein, O&G Employment Law Blog, July 15, 2016

Adam T. Klein, O&G Employment Law Blog, May 27, 2016

Adam T. Klein and Tarik F. Ajami. Statistical evidence has taken its place as a core class of evidence in complex employment cases. Yet despite the centrality of statistics in the field, there is precious little caselaw addressing the use of expert statistical evidence in complex wage-and-hour litigation. However, as a growing number of practitioners have recognized, class and collective wage-and-hour litigation is as well-suited or better-suited for the use of statistical experts as are Title VII and other employment actions.

Adam T. Klein, attorney at Outten & Golden LLP, is interviewed by Katarina E. Wiegele, of Bloomberg BNA for the FLSA Litigation Tracker, Litigation Q & A. Reproduced with permission from FLSA Litigation Tracker, (July 12, 2013). Copyright 2013 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033) http://www.bna.com

Employment law attorney Adam T. Klein, and Sean Farhang. Chapter 8 from Compensation, Work Hours and Benefits: Proceedings of the New York 57th Annual Conference on Labor edited by Hirsch, Samuel Estreicher 05/05/2009

In this paper we discuss legal issues relevant to off-the-clock wage and hour claims. By “off-the-clock” claims we refer to claims alleging that the defendant failed to pay an employee for work time which was compensable under relevant wage and hour law. Our primary focus is application of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) to off-the-clock claims.

Co-Authored by Adam T. Klein and Nantiya Ruan, 776 PLI/Lit. 255, 2008

Adam T. Klein, ReNika Moore, and Professor Scott A. Moss, May 3, 2007.

The legality under Title VII of employer use of credit-history checks as a job criterion or investigative tool is a question best answered in several parts. First, are employee credit-history checks a sufficiently widespread practice to merit the issuance of written guidance by the EEOC? Second, are employee credit-history checks an employment practice that has a disproportionately negative impact on African-Americans (and other protected groups as well)? Third, are employee credit-history checks a practice that is job-related and consistent with business necessity? Fourth, and perhaps most broadly, would barring the use of employee credit-history information in determining employment suitability comport with the goals and purposes of Title VII? Each question will be answered in turn...

Adam T. Klein, Esq. Tarik F. Ajami, Esq. Douglas C. James, Esq. Rachel Wilhelm, 2006

Technophobes, relax: electronic discovery is, at its core, just discovery. And being discovery, it is fundamentally the process of locating, reviewing, and producing materials that are not privileged and that are reasonably likely to lead to evidence admissible at trial. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). But today, virtually every document on the planet is generated and stored in some kind of digital format. The practical effect of this is that plaintiffs and defendants alike are, perhaps unknowingly, sitting atop a mountain of invisible documents, many of which may well be discoverable in the event of litigation.

Adam T. Klein, Mark R. Humowiecki, Tarik F. Ajami, and Cara E. Greene, Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, Vol 10, No. 2, Winter 2006.

Authored by Adam T. Klein, Tarik F. Ajami and Mark R. Humowiecki, 2004. Arbitration of employment discrimination claims – be it a hybrid like “med/arb” and “arb/med” or pure arbitration – at least from a plaintiff’s perspective, offers no real advantages. To the contrary, it appears that the two main objectives of “cram-down” arbitration of employment disputes are (1) to discourage the filing of these claims in the first place and (2) to eliminate the possibility of class action litigation. Once forced into arbitration, the claimant is at a distinct disadvantage due to inequities in information access relative to the employer, the lack of public transparency, the lack of meaningful appellate review, and the “repeat player” dynamic. 

By Adam T. Klein, Esq. and Mark R. Humowiecki, Esq. A paper on corporate outsourcing and how it cheats workers.

More than 60 years after the passage of federal minimum wage and overtime laws, hundreds of West African immigrants were working twelve hours a day, seven days per week, for as little as $1.25 per hour, at New York City’s largest retail grocery stores and pharmacies. How could well-known, multi-billion dollar companies, such as Duane Reade, A&P, and Gristede’s, so openly and egregiously violate the law? Welcome to “outsourcing”— a corporate practice touted by business visionaries as a way of focusing on core competencies and producing efficiencies, but also a tried and true means of lowering labor costs, escaping liability for employment law violations, and blocking labor organizing efforts, all achieved by avoiding a formal employment relationship with outsourced workers.

Co-authored by Adam T. Klein and Nantiya Ruan, American Bar Association Conference for Section on Labor & Employment (Summer 2003)

Adam T. Klein and Scott Moss, Employee Rights Quarterly, Winter 2000.