GRM Named Among Best Law Firms 2024

Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP was honored in the 15th edition of Best Law Firms. The firm received a Tier 1 National ranking in Labor and Employment Litigation and a Tier 1 Regional ranking in New York City for both Labor Law – Union and Labor and Employment Litigation.

According to Best Law Firms, its rankings are determined through “a rigorous, data-driven approach” that combines client and peer evaluations with comprehensive data about law firms.

This recognition highlights GRM’s longstanding reputation as a leading advocate for unions and workers, reflecting the firm’s deep expertise in complex labor and employment matters and its commitment to achieving results that shape the field (Best Law Firms, 2024).

 

GRM Attorneys Maintain Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Rating – 2025

Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP is proud to announce that attorneys Amy Gladstein, James Reif, Walter M. Meginniss Jr., and Beth Margolis continue to maintain the Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent® rating for 2025. This distinction, awarded for more than 130 years, is the highest peer rating standard given by Martindale-Hubbell and reflects both exceptional legal ability and the highest ethical standards.

According to Martindale-Hubbell, the AV Preeminent rating is awarded only to attorneys ranked at the top level of professional excellence by their peers. The continued recognition of GRM’s attorneys demonstrates not only their individual accomplishments, but also the firm’s longstanding leadership in labor and employment law, union representation, and the advancement of workers’ rights.

Home Care Workers Push to Keep Overtime Suit Collective in NY Federal Court

A federal magistrate judge is set to hear arguments this week on whether a wage-and-hour lawsuit brought by home care workers against Community Care Companions Inc. (CCC) can continue as a collective action—proceedings supported by legal counsel including Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP on behalf of the workers.

The case, first filed in 2019, alleges that CCC violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by failing to properly pay overtime, issuing late wages, and neglecting to compensate workers for travel time and expenses between client homes. The plaintiffs argue that these practices represent a systemic failure, not isolated incidents.

The workers contend that the 58 opt-in plaintiffs share near-identical legal and factual claims with named plaintiffs Oretha Beh and Kimberly Balkum, since all were employed during the same period and denied overtime pay in similar ways. In briefing, they emphasized that collective treatment is appropriate under the FLSA because of the common company practices at issue.

The motions are scheduled for oral argument Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, where the case—Beh et al. v. Community Care Companions Inc.—continues to be a closely watched test of collective wage enforcement in the home care industry.

Read the workers’ briefs here and here.

Coverage by Law360.

GRM Partner Kent Hirozawa Awarded the Peggy Browning Fund Award

Partner Kent Hirozawa received the Peggy Browning Fund Award at the New York City Awards Reception.

The award recognizes leaders who have made outstanding contributions to the advancement of workers’ rights and the cause of social and economic justice.

Hirozawa’s recognition reflects both his distinguished career advocating for unions and workers and GRM’s ongoing commitment to strengthening the labor movement.

(Peggy Browning Fund event).

GRM Partner Selected to Super Lawyers Rising Stars 2024

Partner Jessica Harris was named to the Super Lawyers 2024 New York Metro Rising Stars list.

This recognition is reserved for lawyers who demonstrate excellence in practice, with no more than 2.5% of attorneys in the New York Metro area receiving the distinction.

Harris’s selection highlights her strong advocacy for workers and unions and reinforces GRM’s standing as a leader in labor and employment law.

Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP Fights Starbucks Subpoena Over Union-Related Worker Communications

Workers United, represented by Cristina Gallo of Cohen Weiss and Simon LLP, and several former Starbucks employees, represented by Jessica Harris of Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP, are challenging a federal judge’s order requiring them to comply with a subpoena seeking private communications about union sentiment at a Long Island Starbucks store.

In an appeal filed Friday, attorneys for Workers United organizer David Saff and former employees Joselyn Chuquillanqui and Justin Wooster objected to U.S. Magistrate Judge James R. Cho’s order compelling them to turn over internal discussions involving workers, the union, and the media.

The subpoena is part of an ongoing case brought by the National Labor Relations Board seeking injunctive relief under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act. The board is asking for reinstatement of Chuquillanqui, who was allegedly terminated for union organizing at Starbucks’ Great Neck, New York store.

Starbucks originally issued the subpoenas in December 2022, requesting documents related to employees’ views on unionization and any impact Chuquillanqui’s termination may have had on union support. The subpoenaed parties argue the request threatens employee confidentiality and could chill workers’ willingness to exercise their NLRA rights. They criticized one of Starbucks’ requests—seeking insight into how Chuquillanqui’s job performance may have influenced union backing—as a character attack in disguise. They also argued that the requests are overly broad, touch on confidential union strategy, and include materials that postdate the union election, making them irrelevant to the underlying unfair labor practice claims.

The subpoena dispute is part of Poor v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 1:22-cv-07255 (EDNY).

Read Law360’s coverage.

DC Circuit Upholds NLRB’s Decision on Rehab Center’s Illegal Firing and Surveillance

The D.C. Circuit largely upheld a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruling against Northeast Center for Rehabilitation and Brain Injury, affirming the board’s December 2022 findings that the facility violated labor laws by firing two workers involved in a union drive and increasing surveillance of employees during the campaign.

The court agreed with the NLRB’s conclusion that the rehabilitation center had unlawfully monitored workers during off-hours to identify union supporters, a clear violation of employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act.

While the D.C. Circuit ruled that the distribution of informational flyers by the facility was not illegal, it emphasized that the center’s actions—such as the unlawful surveillance and firing of union supporters—were clearly in violation of labor laws.

This decision is a significant win for 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, which had intervened in the case. The union was represented by Kent Hirozawa of Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP.

This ruling reaffirms the NLRB’s authority to protect workers from unlawful employer interference during unionization efforts.

Read the Court’s opinion.

Coverage by Law360.

NLRB Orders New Election at Optum Medical Care Following Employer Interference

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ordered a new union election at Optum Medical Care, ruling that the employer’s actions during the initial vote undermined the fairness of the process. The election, which originally took place on April 12, 2023, resulted in a tie with 36 votes for and 36 votes against union representation, falling short of the required majority.

The union, 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, represented by Jessica Harris of Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP, filed objections after alleging that Optum had engaged in unlawful conduct during the pre-election period. The union claimed that Optum threatened to impose stricter work rules, withhold raises, and sever employees’ direct relationship with management if the workers voted to unionize. Additionally, the company allegedly banned union discussions during work hours and interrogated employees about their support for the union.

NLRB Hearing Officer Elise F. Oviedo found merit in the union’s objections, sustaining 13 out of 15 claims of improper interference. The findings were adopted by NLRB Regional Director John D. Doyle Jr., who ordered a new election to take place on November 29, 2023.

This decision follows ongoing efforts by 1199SEIU to secure union representation for workers at Optum’s Brewster, New York, facility.

Read the Decision and Direction of Election.

Read the Hearing Officer’s decision.

Coverage by Law360.

GRM Attorneys Maintain Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Rating – 2024

Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP congratulates attorneys Amy Gladstein, James Reif, Walter M. Meginniss Jr., and Beth Margolis who continue to maintain the Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent® rating for 2024. The AV Preeminent distinction represents the highest level of professional excellence, combining superior legal ability with adherence to the highest ethical standards.

Martindale-Hubbell’s peer review process has been the gold standard in attorney ratings for over a century. The ongoing recognition of GRM’s attorneys reflects the firm’s deep expertise in labor and employment law and its unwavering commitment to advocating for unions and workers.

NLRB Orders Reinstatement of Worker Fired for Facebook Complaints About Conditions

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that Maywood SNF Operations LLC, doing business as Atlas Healthcare, must reinstate Latoya Carter, a worker fired in 2021 after posting complaints about working conditions on Facebook. The decision follows an unfair labor practice charge filed by 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, represented by Jessica E. Harris of Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss LLP.

Carter’s termination came after she and other workers expressed dissatisfaction with their wages and conditions of employment, and Carter voiced similar concerns on social media. The NLRB determined that the firing violated workers’ rights to discuss workplace conditions. It ordered Carter to be reinstated to her position and paid back pay for the period of time following her termination.

The Board rejected the company’s claim of extenuating circumstances for missing the deadline to respond to the complaint, noting that personal issues of the company’s attorney did not justify the failure to request an extension.

Read the Board’s decision.

Coverage by Law360.