About
A highly strategic and forward-thinking human resources corporate office, general…
Activity
1K followers
-
John DiNome shared thisThis list is way off base Stacy. Section 2 is still in place and protects against discrimination. Section 2 can still be used to enforce the law against attempts to restrict black voting with poll taxes or other illegal obstacles. What the Court’s decision puts a halt to is counting rights litigation that attempted to use the law to overturn districts or results if the election outcomes didn’t mirror racial census percentages. That is a very dangerous assumption about why people cast their votes. So let’s stop the alarm bells and let’s teach law and not social causes in our law schoolJohn DiNome shared thisWhile entirely expected, yesterday was still a devastating day witnessing the Supreme Court eviscerate the last remaining provision of the Voting Rights Act (after delivering the first fatal blow in 2013). The protections so many fought and died for, that have been a bulwark against the disenfranchisement of minority voters, were rendered void. I was able to share my thoughts with 6abc WPVI-TV Philadelphia about the Court's decision and it's impact on the 70% of existing minority House members, including our own local Representative Dwight Evans, who owe their seats to the majority-minority districts made possible by the Voting Rights Act provision the Court struck down yesterday. But elections still matter, perhaps now more than ever before. This May/June - vote in your local primaries! Then make sure you turn out to vote in the November mid-term elections! #WeThePeople can still fight for what (and who) we believe in, no matter what the Supreme Court does. https://lnkd.in/efUj7499How will Supreme Court voting rights ruling shape future redistricting?How will Supreme Court voting rights ruling shape future redistricting?
-
John DiNome shared thisI agree with the premise. First Amendment rights are generally inviolate except if public safety is implicated along with other well recognized exceptions. Satire of the President is protected speech and Pres Trump and team know that. And practice their own version of free speech each-and every day. What I do object to is Jane Fonda being the so called spokesperson for this cause. While the advocacy she engaged in on US soil against the Vietnam war was protected speech, what she did while overseas in Vietnam was reprehensible. She put our POWs lives at risk by her grandstanding and discussions with our enemy. Let’s not forget this while she parades as a free speech advocateJohn DiNome shared thisThe Committee for the First Amendment, a free speech advocacy group led by actor Jane Fonda, slammed Trump for urging ABC to fire Jimmy Kimmel over his comments about Melania Trump. “In America, satire is not a crime. The right to mock, to challenge, and yes, to offend those in power, is foundational to democracy. From late-night television to political cartoons, comedy has long served as a powerful tool to expose hypocrisy, provoke debate, and drive accountability,” the organization said in a statement. The Committee for the First Amendment, referring to the president and first lady’s statement, said in part, “Their demands follow the same old, tired, authoritarian playbook: use the weight of government to pressure media outlets to silence speech it disfavors and chip away at First Amendment protections.” #ResistTrump
-
John DiNome shared thisThese type agencies have run their course. Not needed in today’s legal environment. The agencies do very little to substantively improve workplace conditions. If an employee has a bona fide workplace dispute, file a lawsuit.John DiNome shared thisConnecticut's anti-discrimination agency just got audited and the results are sobering — especially if you have a case pending there. The delays are staggering. Of 20 cases reviewed, 19 were served late. Final cause determinations were late in 15 cases — by a median of 150 days. The worst? Over a year past the statutory deadline. And of course, there's more: The tech is outdated. The CHRO still runs on paper-based processes with a complaint tracking system the auditors called ineffective and unreliable. The agency processes over 2,000 new discrimination cases a year — some taking years to resolve. None of this is new to those of us who practice in the area. It's just confirming what we already know. The agency's response to the audit? The same as in prior audits: not enough staff. And there's probably some truth to that — staffing dropped nearly 50% over the past decade. But for employers sitting on the other side of a complaint, the reason matters less than the reality. Here's what this means for employers: - Expect delays and build them into your planning. Statutory deadlines at the CHRO are aspirational, not actual. - Use the time wisely. Preserve evidence, lock in witness accounts, and prepare as if the case is heading to court, because it might. - Keep your own house in order. Document employment decisions. Maintain records. Respond promptly. When a case finally gets investigated, your documentation will matter far more than the agency's timeline. To be clear, this is not a dig at the individuals who work there; many of them are well-meaning professionals who have to deal with a lot and do their jobs well when the cases are heard. However, for employers, it's an agency that is underwater in its obligations and that means cases are taking longer to decide. Patience is a virtue as the expression goes. Full analysis on the blog with a link in comments. #EmploymentLaw #HRCompliance
-
John DiNome shared thisWhy even discuss this? If the clients are willing to pay the rates and the firms think it makes sense to pay this type comp for this type work, no reason to discuss here. What am I missing?John DiNome shared thisThis is bananas. If a lawyer is making a guaranteed $10 million, they should be generating $30 million in revenue under the traditional rule of thumb. Is that what appellate litigators are doing these days?!? They don't exactly have armies of lawyers working on their appeals... (Gift link to the WSJ article in the comments.)
-
John DiNome shared thisThey won’t unless we, the voters, hold them accountable. There are not the same set of incentives, penalties and life or death consequences as in the military. As such, these standards don’t translate as effectively to the civilian world. That is simple reality.John DiNome shared thisOne of the first leadership lessons you learn as an officer in the Marine Corps is this: YOU are responsible for all your unit does, or fails to do. It’s that simple. You can delegate authority, but you can never delegate responsibility. I really wish more folks in today’s society (especially our elected leaders) could grasp that concept …
-
John DiNome shared thisNot sure this is as simple or clear as choosing between those who love war and those who love peace. I have not served in combat but know many who have. And have also studied many armed conflicts and the political and military leaders who served our nation during those time periods. I think it is far too simplistic and somewhat disparaging to those who served our nation in combat or who have led our nation in combat to assume that they “loved war”. Perhaps they were guided by patriotism. Or by the principle of peace through strength. We have faced and will face adversaries who seek to challenge us. We may love peace but better be prepared to engage in war to achieve that peace. Thoughts? Comments?
-
John DiNome shared thisIf it is that bad, why are you still living here? I suggest a little more optimism about our nation.John DiNome shared thisAmerica spends more on #healthcare than any country on earth. And still ranks last. The land of the "free" is also the land of: More school shootings than the rest of the world combined. More people in prison than any democracy in history. Half a million medical bankruptcies every year. 5 men worth more than 165 million Americans combined. And still they tell us how they're the greatest country on earth. Delusion is one hell of a drug.
-
John DiNome shared thisAll true. Great analysis. But misses the larger point—-are you for or against holding Iran’s feet to the fire? Can this be viewed as short term pain in exchange for rebalancing our relationship and the region’s relationship with Iran? Will this lead to change in Lebanon also? I think it was the right call to challenge Iran. It needed to be done. While we can be critical of Pres Trump and his administration for a variety of things, I believe he got this one right. It is easy to get a bunch of favorable clicks about the billions spent and higher gas prices. But I think it ignores the larger questions about Iran and the Middle East which have dogged us for decades.John DiNome shared thisThis war has already cost Americans over $42 billion in the first month alone. That's before you factor in shipping costs up more than 300%, utility rates that climbed 13% last year, and grocery prices that are still rising. Every day Iran keeps the Strait of Hormuz closed is essentially a tax on American households through increased gas prices, higher electric bills, and costlier groceries. This is a failure of diplomacy.
-
John DiNome shared thisIn my opinion, lawsuits are not the proper route for this. Courts have typically not inserted themselves in political matters. Guess how Congress can challenge the executive——-come on take a guess. Answer: by asserting their position. Assuming their Article I role. Not being passive.John DiNome shared thisIt was a privilege to serve as co-counsel, with pro bono counsel at Miller Johnson and Rose Cuison-Villazor, representing 187 Members of Congress in this amicus filing arguing that the Executive Branch has usurped the Congressional role and highlighting the bipartisan support for the various Temporary Protected Status programs.
John DiNome commented on a post
3h
I am not surprised by anything like that Suzanne. My point is your LinkedIn post is not going to push those type folks to investigate. They are going to remain somewhat clueless and will learn the hard way. After they have to write some checks.
John DiNome commented on a post
4h
Of course. My point is not such a great tracking moment. You get that. Yeah, investigate
John DiNome commented on a post
5h
There is no take away from this. You can do all the training and investigating under the sun. If you have a rogue actor like in this situation, you just deal with it. You fire them. You write a check to the harassed employee. You then regroup and try to move forward internally.
But this is not sone great HR moment or lesson to learn. It is just bad employee. Respond. Move forward.
Training won’t fix this. This type of bad employee can’t be “trained”.
Experience & Education
-
American Academic Health System
View John’s full experience
See their title, tenure and more.
or
Licenses & Certifications
-
Licensed to Practice Law in New Jersey
New Jersey
-
Licensed to Practice Law in Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania
Other similar profiles
Explore more posts
Explore top content on LinkedIn
Find curated posts and insights for relevant topics all in one place.
View top content