loader
Page is loading...
Print Logo Logo
Labor and Employment Attorney - Employment Lawyer - Indianapolis
OVERVIEW

Labor and Employment

Every day, our attorneys navigate complex labor and employment laws and regulations, guiding clients through difficult workforce challenges. Our passion for what we do and the clients we serve allows us to tackle hard issues and help stamp out opportunistic employment claims.

At Barnes & Thornburg, we believe that to succeed in today’s competitive global marketplace, we must exceed our client’s expectations at every turn. Our national Labor and Employment team provides comprehensive legal counsel, helping clients plan for and anticipate the unexpected. We advise on the full range of HR issues affecting growth and profitability — from productivity, employee benefits and rising healthcare costs, to traditional labor law and union avoidance tactics, to serious litigation threatening the bottom line and reputation.

Our clients range from Fortune 100 to family owned companies. Our firm represents some of the world’s most recognizable employers on regional, national and international levels across domestic and international time zones. We also work with small businesses in need of advice on specific matters.

Dedicated to realizing the right result, we are committed to delivering honed skill and relentless determination to complex litigation and class action claims. Our litigators are not only advocates, but also appropriately aggressive. We offer a proven track record of favorable outcomes whether behind the scenes, in arbitration and mediation, in state and federal court, or before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). We are appreciated for our ability to support, lead and influence vital conversations and communications that impact human resource decisions on all fronts.

Our attorneys serve as critical members of client teams and a crucial component of their success. We seek to provide solutions that minimize the inherent risks of managing a workforce. We serve as trusted advisers, never losing sight of what is important to each client. We do it all with tenacity and creativity, as well as laser sharp focus on each client’s specific business goals. Our attorneys are personally committed to making themselves available, accessible and valuable by delivering a unique blend of business smarts, legal exactitude and cost effectiveness.

Labor and Employment Practice Leaders

Kenneth Yerkes

Kenneth J. Yerkes

Partner
Labor and Employment Department Chair

Indianapolis

P 317-231-7513

F 317-231-7433

WANT TO GET IN TOUCH?

Contact Us
EXPERIENCE

  • A former field engineer alleged racial discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act after he was terminated for violating the employer's "zero tolerance" policy regarding the use of company-issued equipment. During an audit of two of the employee's company-issued laptops, the employer used a software program which detected pornographic images accessed at times when the employee was at work and off of work. Barnes & Thornburg successfully assisted the client in obtaining summary judgment on all of the plaintiff's claims.
  • A non-profit health care organization sought Barnes & Thornburg LLP's assistance after an adverse finding by the government as part of an affirmative action audit. With the firm's assistance, the client successfully negotiated a conciliation agreement with the government. The audit has now been concluded with no further adverse findings.
  • Assisted client employer in obtaining summary judgment in a "regarded as" disability claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
  • Assisted client in obtaining disqualification of plaintiff's counsel in employment case.
  • Assisted client in obtaining summary judgment in age discrimination claim.
  • Assisted client in obtaining summary judgment in professor's 42 U.S.C.S. § 2000 e-2(a)(1) gender discrimination claim when professor failed to present prima facie case of reverse discrimination, and university showed that more qualified woman was hired to teach world history.
  • Assisted client with case in which court found no direct evidence of racial discrimination nor evidence of similarly situated non-black employees who were treated better dooms Plaintiff's racial discrimination termination claim.
  • Assisted client-employer in defeating a motion to compel financial information on client's corporate net worth because the information was irrelevant to an assessment of punitive damages.

    Multiple plaintiffs filed a Title VII employment discrimination action against their employer, Covington Foods, Inc. alleging sexual harassment by members of its management. Plaintiffs filed a motion to compel disclosure of Covington’s financial information arguing that it was relevant to their assessment of an award of punitive damages.

    In ruling against Plaintiffs, the court observed that the law of diminishing marginal utility, which supports the relevance of a natural person's wealth to assess punitive damages, does not apply to corporations. Specifically, corporations are abstract entities whose wealth is owned by stockholders. Since the marginal utility of punitive damages does not decrease as the wealth of the corporation increases, its net worth is irrelevant to the assessment of punitive damages against it. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion to compel was denied. The matter was tried to a jury which rendered a defense verdict on all claims.
  • Assisted client-employer in obtaining summary judgment in a age discrimination claim.

    Calvin Latner worked for Delta-HA and its predecessor, Delta Resins and Refractories, Inc., for about seven years. Delta-HA eventually joined forces with Borden to form HAI. Thereafter, Latner was terminated as part of a reduction in force. Latner subsequently filed suit alleging age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), based both on his termination and the company’s failure to rehire him. Defendants Delta-HA and HA-International moved for summary judgment.

    The court observed that although Latner established a prima facie case of age discrimination, he failed to produce sufficient evidence that would permit a jury to conclude that his employer’s stated reasons for his termination and failure to rehire him were pretexts for age discrimination. Although Latner introduced evidence of age based comments made by a supervisor, they were not relevant as the supervisor was not involved in any relevant employment decisions. Instead, the evidence indicated that the decisions to terminate Latner's employment and not rehire him were based on the fact that another individual possessed more overall “product knowledge” in relation to the organization’s goals. Additionally, this individual was noted as a better salesman than Latner. Accordingly, the court granted the motion for summary judgment.
  • Barnes & Thornburg assisted this client with an OFCCP compliance review. This was a difficult audit due to recordkeeping issues. Ultimately, we were able to help the client successfully close this audit.
  • Barnes & Thornburg LLP has provided general advice relating to affirmative action plans for a health care assessment company.
  • Barnes & Thornburg presented training to this client’s in-house legal and HR staff on affirmative action compliance. The firm has since assisted the client with defending a number of affirmative action compliance evaluations for the company’s various subsidiaries.
  • Barnes & Thornburg's Keith White acts as outside labor and employment counsel to EP Management Corporation, a diversified holding company that includes EP Minerals, a leading global supplier of diatomaceous earth products. Most recently, Keith assisted the client in negotiating a collective bargaining agreement in Blacksburg, Virginia.
  • Client-employer obtained summary judgment on a former employee's ADEA damages claim because the employee did not discharge her duty to mitigate damages; a full-time bartending job was not comparable to the former managerial job in terms of duties and earnings.

    Hazelene Hutton was employed by Sally Beauty Company, Inc. (Sally Beauty) until her termination in 2001. Hutton was 58 years old. Hutton subsequently brought a lawsuit against Sally Beauty arguing that she was terminated based on her age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Sally Beauty moved for summary judgment based on damages, arguing that even if Hutton were able to prove age discrimination, she would not be entitled to damages due to her alleged failure to mitigate these damages.

    In support of its motion for summary judgment, Sally Beauty submitted a collection of classified ads from local newspapers demonstrating that comparable retail management job openings were available in the geographic region where Hutton lived. For example, there were openings for video store managers, store team leaders, an office manager for a winery, managers for a Hallmark store, merchandising managers and store managers for a clothing store.

    The Court observed that Hutton had not made any attempts to secure comparable employment. Additionally, Hutton introduced no evidence in support of a good faith effort to secure comparable employment. The Court observed that Hutton’s full-time bartending job was not comparable in terms of duties and responsibilities or in terms of earnings. Accordingly, the district court granted Sally Beauty’s motion for summary judgment.
  • Confronted with an 86-paragraph complaint extensively detailing facts allegedly supporting former Roche Diagnostics Corporation Account Manager Martin Grant’s claims of age discrimination (including an assertion his direct supervisor told him he should leave Roche because “sales is a young man’s game”), Ken Yerkes and David Pryzbylski successfully assisted firm client Roche obtain Summary Judgment on all of Grant’s claims in the Eastern District of New York.

    From the outset, litigation was contentious, as Grant immediately began raising electronic discovery issues. Discovery ultimately lasted more than a year, during which time tens of thousands of documents were produced, depositions were conducted around New York state and Pennsylvania – including an expert regarding Grant’s alleged damages – and Ken and David tracked down a key witness to obtain an affidavit supporting Roche’s defenses.

    In awarding summary judgment for Roche, the Court heavily relied on Ken and David’s Reply Brief that dismantled each of Grant’s arguments and also looked to the affidavit testimony of the former Roche employee that was secured by Ken and David. The Court capped its colorful opinion by holding “the record is devoid of any evidence that age was a motivating factor in--let alone the ‘but-for’ cause of--Roche’s decision to terminate Mr. Grant’s employment.” In addition to a favorable ruling on the merits, the Court awarded Roche over $6,000.00 in costs it incurred while defending the lawsuit, including electronic discovery costs.
  • Court granted client employer summary judgment on the employee's race discrimination claim because he failed to show that the employee's reason for terminating him, namely, due to a reduction in force, was pretextual.
  • Defended and closed two affirmative action audits for one of the nation's largest accounting and consulting firms. The organization has 25 facilities with 2,400 personnel and serves clients worldwide in more than 400 cities.
  • Defended diocese against various claims, including blacklisting and tortious interference with a business relationship. On appeal, the Indiana Supreme Court reversed, remanded, and instructed the trial court to grant summary judgment.
  • Denial of holiday pay.
  • Discharge for insubordination and profanity to supervisor; reinstatement wo/back pay; grievant required to pass medical exam to determine fitness for employment.
Load More
PROFESSIONALS
Clear all filters
loader

WANT TO GET IN TOUCH?

Contact Us
INSIGHTS & EVENTS

Alerts

Michigan Legislature Passes Last-Minute Amendments to Earned Sick Time Act, Minimum Wage Laws

Michigan Legislature Passes Last-Minute Amendments to Earned Sick Time Act, Minimum Wage Laws

people network_listing

DHS Update Regarding Temporary Protected Status for Venezuela

Executive Order Covers DEI, Affirmative Action Programs in Private, Government and Educational Sectors

immigration

First Days: Initial Executive Orders on Immigration and Border Security

Immigration close up

Immigration and Employment of Foreign Nationals: A Look Ahead

Texas Court

In Nationwide Edict, Texas Federal Court Vacates Salary Threshold Final Rule

View All

Events

labor law concept

Labor and Employment Update for Employers - March 2025

MHRA March Lunch Meeting

Immigration Insights: Weekly Fireside Chats

California Labor and Employment Laws: Essential Insights

Michiana SHRM Monthly Luncheon

Legal Primer For Small Business Owners: Building Your Business Acumen

View All

Blogs

California Appeals Court Holds Plaintiff May Escape Arbitration in PAGA Claims

California Appeals Court Holds Plaintiff May Escape Arbitration in PAGA Claims

Fast Track to a First Contract: Senator Proposes Faster Labor Contracts Act

New York Expands Paid Sick Leave to Include Prenatal Personal Leave

While FTC Non-Compete Appeals Linger, Ohio Poses Ban on Non-Competes, Forum Selection, and Other Restrictive Covenants

Streamlining Compliance: Electronic Distribution of Form 1095-C Now Available

From Slogans to Solutions: Getting Past Buzzwords to Real Results (and Reducing Legal Risk)

View All

News

2025 Southern California Super Lawyers Names Four Barnes & Thornburg Attorneys to Super Lawyers, Rising Stars Lists

2025 Indiana Super Lawyers Names 24 Barnes & Thornburg Attorneys to Super Lawyers, Rising Stars Lists

Acting NLRB GC Signals New Era with Guidance Memo Purge

Barnes & Thornburg Attorney, Practice Ranked in Chambers Global Guide 2025

Georgia Super Lawyers Names Eight Barnes & Thornburg Attorneys to 2025 Super Lawyers, Rising Stars Lists

Barnes & Thornburg Attorneys Selected for Prestigious Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Programs

View All

Publications

cpu

Pay Transparency in Illinois

Preparing for Worksite Enforcement & Form I-9 Compliance During a Second Trump Administration

Illinois’ Ever Changing Employment Laws

Basics of Collective Bargaining Law in Principle and Practice

'Come Together, Right Now' – New Collective Bargaining Negotiation Practice Note

Justices' Starbucks Ruling May Limit NLRB Injunction Wins

View All

Videos and Podcasts

The Human Resource: Marijuana vs. a Drug Policy

The Human Resource: Marijuana vs. a Drug Policy

Legal Primer for Black-Owned Small Businesses

Legal Primer For Black-Owned Small Businesses

Trending Connect