Tag Archive for: minnesota

Using Expert Witnesses Strategically in Employment Litigation — CLE Panel Recap

Kitzer Rochel attorney Brian Rochel recently moderated a CLE panel focused on the strategic use of expert witnesses in employment and civil rights litigation—from pre-litigation through trial. The panel offered a practical, end-to-end discussion grounded in real-world litigation and trial experience. The CLE was sponsored by the Minnesota Chapter of the National Employment Lawyers Association (MN-NELA).

The discussion covered early-case considerations, including when and why to consult or retain experts before litigation to shape case theory, damages analysis, and settlement strategy. Panelists also addressed expert practice during discovery, including reports, disclosures, and depositions, as well as effective trial presentation. Topics included introducing experts on the stand, preparing for direct and cross-examination, positioning experts as teachers rather than advocates, using visuals and demonstratives, and critically evaluating defense expert testimony.

Brian moderated a panel featuring an accomplished group of trial lawyers:

  • Jeff Storms of Storms Dworak LLC, a leading civil rights and plaintiff’s attorney.

  • Mary Olszewska, co-founder of Fellowship Law Group and an experienced employment and civil rights litigator.

  • J. Ashwin Madia of Madia Law LLC, a nationally recognized trial lawyer and Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers.

The panel reinforced a key takeaway for employment litigators: expert witnesses are not just trial tools. When used strategically and early, they can meaningfully shape case value and litigation outcomes.

Kitzer Rochel Attorney Brian Rochel Quoted in Law360

Kitzer Rochel, PLLP is proud to announce that partner Brian Rochel was recently quoted in Law360 Employment Authority in an article covering the upcoming Eighth Circuit arguments on Minnesota’s construction worker classification law.

The case—Minnesota Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors Inc. et al. v. Nicole Blissenbach et al.—challenges a 2024 law establishing a 14-factor test for determining whether construction workers are properly classified as independent contractors. Trade groups argue that the statute is too vague to enforce, while the State of Minnesota contends the plaintiffs lack standing to bring the challenge.

In his comments, Brian explained that the dispute raises a fundamental question: whether the law creates a “tough but clear compliance standard” or instead a “vague, punitive approach” that contractors cannot realistically follow. He also noted that the Eighth Circuit may weigh whether contractors must begin complying now or whether courts should take a “wait-and-see” approach.

This litigation has important implications for Minnesota workers and employers. Worker misclassification can deprive employees of critical protections like minimum wage, overtime pay, and benefits, while also creating compliance uncertainty for employers.

The full Law360 article, “8th Circ. To Weigh Minn. Classification Challenge” (Sept. 12, 2025), can be accessed here.

Phillip Kitzer, Frances Baillon, and Brian Rochel Again Named Super Lawyers; Frances Rated Top 100 and Top 50 Women Lawyers

Kitzer Rochel is proud to announce that our attorneys have once again been recognized for their outstanding legal work in Minnesota. Frances Baillon, Phillip Kitzer, and Brian Rochel have each been selected as 2025 Minnesota Super Lawyers for another year.

In addition, Frances Baillon earned special honors by being named to both the lists of Top 50 Women Super Lawyers in Minnesota and Top 100 Minnesota Super Lawyers for another year.

These honors reflect not only the individual excellence of our attorneys but also the collective strength of our firm. Super Lawyers is a nationally respected rating service that annually recognizes top attorneys through a rigorous selection process. This process includes nominations from peers, independent research, and evaluations by a blue-ribbon panel of attorneys. Being named to the Super Lawyers list is a prestigious recognition of consistent professional achievement, ethical standards, and peer recognition.

We are incredibly grateful to our clients, peers, and the broader legal community for their continued trust and support. At Kitzer Rochel, we remain deeply committed to providing the highest quality legal advocacy, driven by integrity, expertise, and compassion. We look forward to another year of dedicated service to our clients and community.

Employment Protections in Minnesota: What Employees Need to Know in a Changing Landscape

The Trump Administration has been direct in its efforts to combat decades-old nondiscrimination standards. But while its actions have created a lot of (justifiable) coverage and outrage, it is important to understand the vast majority of legal protections in employment remain untouched.

Along with nationwide legal actions challenging the recent orders and changes, there are still laws—especially in Minnesota—that protect workers.

  1. Antidiscrimination Protection

Federal contractors have long been required to provide equal employment opportunity. A recent executive order removed that requirement and provided that the Department of Labor’s contract office would no longer promote diversity or affirmative action.

But this does not remove equal employment protection for employees—it only removes that particular requirement for companies to contract with the federal government. The protections in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) are not changed, and all employers in Minnesota must follow them. It is still unlawful to discriminate based on race, religion, disability, national origin, sex, marital status, familial status, age, sexual orientation, and gender identity in Minnesota.

  1. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Despite some shake-ups within the EEOC, including the dismissal of two of its three Democratic Commissioners, its essential work remains. The EEOC cannot currently issue new rules or policies, because it no longer has enough Commissioners to vote on them.

But you can still file an EEOC charge. Even if the EEOC does not pursue your case, you can still request a Notice of Right to Sue and pursue your claim in court. The same rights in Title VII and the MHRA still protect you, and are being enforced not only by the EEOC but also the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) and the courts. You can also file a charge with the MDHR if you have experienced discrimination for virtually the same reasons as with the EEOC.

  1. LGBTQ+ Protection

LGBTQ+ rights are involved in the actions above as well as two other executive orders. The first order specifies that the United States only recognizes two sexes, and explains how its policies will define and apply “male” and “female.” It requires federal agencies and employees to use the approved terminology in all communications and remove any references to gender or gender identity. For example, any government form to be filled out must list sex as male or female, and cannot ask about a person’s gender identity or include any other options, such as non-binary. The second order is about transgender people participating in sports, and applies sex-based distinctions that disregard gender identity.

But these orders have been challenged in court for violating the U.S. Constitution, among other things. And states still have protections that exceed federal protections. Minnesota, in particular, has protections for LGBTQ+ people that remain unchanged by these orders, notably the Minnesota Human Rights Act. Minnesota’s Attorney General, Keith Ellison, has recently expressed that the executive order does not override the MHRA.

Even with the federal policy changes in civil rights protection and enforcement, Minnesota (among other states) has strong laws that still protect your rights. The MHRA is among the most protective laws in the country, and it is unchanged.

Conclusion

If you have questions about employment law in the wake of the Trump administration’s efforts to change legal norms, contact us today to learn more.

The Law Continues to Get Better for Minnesota Employees: MHRA Expanded

The Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) has been expanded in several important ways that will help employees across Minnesota. Governor Walz has signed a new bill, HF 4109, and it’s packed with great updates to the MHRA to help workers all over the state. Some highlights of the changes include:

Key Points of the New Law

  1. Intersectional Discrimination: The new law recognizes that discrimination can happen to people who belong to more than one protected group. This means if someone faces unfair treatment because they belong to multiple groups, like being both a woman and a person of color, the law will protect them.
  2. Disability Definition: The law now has a broader definition of “disability.” It includes conditions that come and go or are in remission, aligning more closely with the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA).
  3. Harassment Protection: It’s now clear that harassment based on any protected characteristic (like race, gender, or disability) is against the law, not just sexual harassment.
  4. Familial Status: The definition of “familial status” has been expanded, but the details are not provided in the summary.
  5. Extended Deadlines: If the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) dismisses a claim, workers now have 90 days to file a lawsuit, instead of the previous 45 days. This matches the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) limit.
  6. Statute of Limitations: If MDHR takes too long to investigate a case, workers won’t lose their right to file a lawsuit because of it. This fixes some old case law problems.
  7. Punitive Damages: There is no longer a cap on punitive damages for claims against non-government entities. This means workers can potentially receive more money if they win their case because their employer intentionally or recklessly violated the law.
  8. Treble Damages: The law confirms that workers can get triple the amount of emotional distress damages, not just economic damages.
  9. Jury Decisions: In cases under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, a jury, not a judge, will decide all damages questions.

How the Law Came to Be

This bill was created by the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) and is the first of its kind. The MDHR submitted an omnibus bill that was carried forward and put into law in a bipartisan effort, and signed by Governor Walz. Kitzer Rochel attorneys Frances Baillon, Phillip Kitzer, and Brian Rochel all helped in the effort to expand the MHRA along with many other members of Minnesota’s Chapter of the National Employment Lawyers Association (MN-NELA). Thanks to the effort of many dedicated lawyers and lawmakers, we’ve achieved something amazing by working together. This new law will provide better protection and support for workers in Minnesota.

When Do the Changes Come Into Effect

Some of the new provisions are in effect already because they only clarify the existing law. Any new legal requirement added by the law will go into effect on August 1, 2024. Contact us if you have questions about this exciting new update or employment law more generally.

Phillip Kitzer, Frances Baillon, and Brian Rochel Again Named Super Lawyers; Frances Named among Top 100 and Top 50 Women Lawyers

Kitzer Rochel is excited to announce that the dedication and expertise of our legal team have been recognized yet again as Brian Rochel, Phillip Kitzer and Frances Baillon have been selected as Super Lawyers in Minnesota for this year. In addition, Frances made the lists of Top 50 Minnesota Women Super Lawyers and Top 100 Minnesota Super Lawyers. We are immensely proud of this recognition and grateful for the trust our clients place in us year after year.

Super Lawyers is a highly respected rating service that annually recognizes outstanding lawyers from various practice areas across the country. Each year, candidates undergo a rigorous selection process, involving nominations, independent research, and evaluations. Being chosen as a Super Lawyer is a remarkable achievement, as it reflects not only exceptional legal skills but also a consistent track record of success and the highest level of professional ethics.

We remain committed to upholding the highest standards of legal excellence and providing the best possible representation to our clients. Thank you to our clients and peers for placing their trust in us, and we look forward to continuing to serve the community with expertise, integrity, and compassion.

What If I Fail a Drug or Alcohol Test at Work?

Employer-administered drug and alcohol testing in Minnesota is governed by the Minnesota Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA). If your employer or prospective employer requires you to take a drug or alcohol and you fail, you have certain legal rights.

If you test positive, you must be given written notice of your results and your rights under DATWA.[1] Your employer may require you to provide information on medication you take or other information relevant to an explanation of the positive test result.[2] Your employer must cover the cost of the initial test and a confirmatory test. The employee may request a confirmatory retest at their own expense. You have the legal right to submit information that explains your positive test result within three working days of receiving notice of confirmatory test results.[3] Within three working days, you may also request a confirmatory retest of the original sample at your expense.[4]

If you test positive for a pre-employment drug or alcohol test associated with a conditional offer of employment, the offer may not be withdrawn based on the results of the initial test alone. To withdraw the offer for a positive test result, the initial test result must be verified by a confirmatory test.[5]

If you test positive while you are already an employee, you have a number of legal rights, and your employer is subject to certain legal requirements. First, your employer is not allowed to terminate your employment, discipline you, discriminate against you, or require rehabilitation on the basis of an initial test that has not been verified by a confirmatory test.[6] Second, if the positive result is your first positive result for that employer, your employer cannot terminate your employment unless you are first given the opportunity to participate in a drug or alcohol counseling or rehabilitation program and then you refuse to participate in or fail to complete the program.[7] However, your employer may temporarily suspend you or transfer you to another position pending the outcome of a confirmatory test or confirmatory retest if the employer reasonably believes this is necessary for safety reasons.[8]

If your employer or a prospective employer has not followed these legal requirements or retaliated against you for asserting your rights under DATWA, contact us. Our experienced employment law attorneys would be happy to discuss your case and help you understand your legal rights and options.

 

[1] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 6(b).

[2] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 6(b).

[3] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 6(c).

[4] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 6(c).

[5] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 11.

[6] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 10(a).

[7] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 10(b).

[8] Minn. Stat. § 181.953, subd. 10(c).

Minnesota is an At-Will Employment State, What Does That Mean?

When you hear that Minnesota is an “at-will” employment state, you may wonder what that means for you as an employee. It simply means you can quit your job for any reason at any time, you do not have to give notice nor a reason to your employer for leaving your position.

However, it also means an employer can terminate your employment for any reason at any time as long as the reason for termination is not illegal. For example, it is illegal for an employer to terminate employment based on an employee’s race, age, sex, sexual orientation, or religion, to name a few protected classes and statuses. Similarly, it is illegal for an employer to terminate an employee because the employee reported something unlawful, like discrimination or corporate wrongdoing.

Being an “at-will” employment state makes it easy for an employee and their employer to part ways if the position is not working for one or both of the parties. But, if you feel you have been wrongfully terminated based on discrimination, contact us at Kitzer Rochel. Our experienced employment law attorneys would be happy to discuss your case and help you understand your legal rights and options.

When Do I Get My Final Paycheck?

When an employee resigns or is terminated, they usually wonder when they will get their last paycheck. When must a company pay a final paycheck, and when could it become wage theft?

First, if an employee is discharged or terminated, then they must be paid “immediately upon demand.” That means that an employee can request a final paycheck immediately after learning they were fired. An employer then has 24 hours to provide the final paycheck after that request or demand.

Second, if an employee gives proper notice of resignation, employers may provide a paycheck on the employee’s last day at work. But employers are NOT legally required to do so. An employer has up to the pay period following the employee’s final day (that is more than 5 days after the employee quit) to provide an employee their final paycheck. But it cannot be longer than 20 days after separation. So, if an employee resigned on the same day as their “payday,” that doesn’t mean that an employee will receive their final paycheck on that day.

If you resigned from an employer and the next pay period has passed and you did not receive full compensation you may be looking at potential wage theft. Similarly, if you resigned from an employer more than 20 days ago and you have not received your final paycheck, you may be looking at potential wage theft. State and federal laws prohibit various forms of wage theft.

If you have questions about wage theft, a final paycheck, or other employment law questions, please contact us today. We are happy to answer questions and assess if we can help with your situation.

Governor Walz’s Recent COVID-19 Order Gives Employees Important Rights

On May 13, 2020, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz issued Executive Order 20-54, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic crisis. Among other things, the Governor’s executive order provides rights to Minnesota employees that all workers should be aware of.

First, the executive order prohibits employers from discriminating or retaliating against employees who ask their employers questions or expresses concerns about COVID-19 (the Coronavirus), or their health and safety regarding the virus outbreak.

Second, the executive order generally prohibits employers from discriminating or retaliating against employees who wear gloves, cloth, eye protection, or other protective gear in the course of their work.

Third, the executive order gives employees the right to refuse to work under conditions that they, in good faith, reasonably believe pose an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.

Fourth, the executive order gives employees the right to request the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (“DLI”) conduct an inspection of their workplace if they suspect a COVID-19 threat to health and/or safety is present.

Lastly, the executive order gives employees the right to seek reasonable accommodations related to COVID-19, including the ability to work from home, if possible.

All of these protections contain important caveats, so if you have questions about Executive Order 20-54, or COVID-19 at work, you should contact an experienced employment lawyer.

If you are an employee who has experienced difficult circumstances with your employer related to COVID-19, we are here to help. Please contact Teske, Katz, Kitzer, and Rochel, PLLP. We advocate on behalf of employees facing discrimination, retaliation, and whistleblower related issues in the workplace.