New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is again probing into the NFL’s hiring policies, over concerns the coaches have been asking college players about their sexual orientations. This is just three years after Schneiderman looked into the NFL for the same kind of concerning questions in 2013.

At last month’s Scouting Combine–a weeklong showcase of promising college players for coaches and other officials every February–Ohio State cornerback Eli Apple was asked by a coach for the Atlanta Falcons if he “liked men.” The coach in question, Marquand Manuel, has since apologized.

Schneiderman wrote a letter to Robert Gulliver, the Chief of Human Resources for the NFL, alerting him to these concerns. In the letter, Schneiderman points out the history that his office has had with working with the NFL over issues of sexual discrimination. He wrote:

I write today with serious concerns regarding the persistence of conduct at League-affiliated recruiting events that may violate New York State law concerning sexual orientation discrimination, and specifically regarding reports of an incident at this year’s Scouting Combine that appears nearly identical to the incident which triggered my office’s initial inquiry into the League.

The investigation that was conducted in 2013 found no specific issues but as a result the NFL put in place things like a revised player code of conduct to try to prevent sexual orientation discrimination.

Schneiderman also highlighted other issues that the NFL has had with these kinds of questions in the past. He specifically mentioned questions asked about Michael Sam, the first publicly gay player to be drafted by the NFL.

Essentially, Schneiderman’s letter focused on how questions that reference players’ sexual orientation have consistently been issues in the past, and while the NFL has taken those steps to prevent those changes, complaints keep springing up. As a result, Schneiderman is asking for the league to provide “a detailed summary of the steps that it has taken to to eliminate sexual orientation discrimination and to prevent such incidents as these from occurring since our first engagement in 2013.”

Brian McCarthy, a league spokesman, stated:

NFL players and prospective players have the right to work in a positive environment that is free from all forms of harassment, intimidation and discrimination. […] Our policies stress that clubs must ensure that our Draft-eligible players and potential signees are afforded a professional and safe NFL environment that is consistent with state and federal law and the CBA and reflects our shared commitment to diversity and inclusion, conduct and character.

While the probe didn’t really turn up anything in 2013, Schneiderman’s renewed look will hopefully keep coaches and other team officials from asking inappropriate questions moving forward.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NY AG Probes NFL Questions About Players’ Sexual Orientation appeared first on Law Street.

If you’ve watched a football game on TV lately, you’ve probably seen a whole litany of ads for the two leading fantasy companies–DraftKings and FanDuel. While fantasy football has been a popular pastime for years, DraftKings and FanDuel have entered the scene relatively recently: they were founded in 2012 and 2009 respectively. But with great success and power comes great responsibility, and now both sites are under investigation by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman for insider-trading-like activity.

The premise of DraftKings, FanDuel, and other similar sites is simple–it takes the traditional model of a season-long fantasy competition, and condenses it into smaller contests, usually just one week or one day. Both sites offer a variety of sports to choose from, including NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, NASCAR, and some college sports. You put up money to play, and win money if you’re successful.

Whether or not these activities should be considered gambling has been a point of contention, but the legality tends to rest on the fact that technically these are games of skill, not chance. Participants have to have background knowledge of the players they are choosing, and make informed decisions based on that knowledge. However, not all states agree with that assessment–Arizona, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, and Washington all have deemed participating in sites like DraftKings and FanDuel illegal.

So, while these very wealthy new companies are already rife with controversy, it really comes as no surprise that a new investigation is being launched. The reason that Schneiderman is looking into DraftKings and FanDuel is because of concerns that employees at each have won big payouts on their competitors’ sites. There are allegations that these employees have access to inside information in the form of stats and algorithms and are using that information to profit by playing themselves. One particular incident sparked outrage over this possibility–mid-level DraftKings employee Ethan Haskell recently won $350,000 on FanDuel. The question is whether or not Haskell was able to win that money because he had an advantage as a DraftKings employee with access to insider information, or because he was just a skilled fantasy player.

In response to the scandal, both companies banned their employees from playing on each others’ sites, and issued a joint statement, which read in part:

Nothing is more important to DraftKings and FanDuel than the integrity of the games we offer to our customers. Both companies have strong policies in place to ensure that employees do not misuse any information at their disposal and strictly limit access to company data to only those employees who require it to do their jobs. Employees with access to this data are rigorously monitored by internal fraud control teams, and we have no evidence that anyone has misused it.

However, it will now be up to the Attorney General’s investigation to determine whether or not that’s true. Schneiderman will be attempting to determine “the prospect that employees of daily fantasy football sites have won lucrative payouts based on inside information not available to the public.” He also added: “I don’t have comments on the specifics of that matter at this time. But fraud is fraud and we’ll investigate it wherever we find it.” So, if he finds it, both DraftKings and FanDuel may be in serious trouble.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Fantasy Fight: DraftKings and FanDuel Investigated by New York Attorney General appeared first on Law Street.

If you’ve ever worked retail before you should be familiar with “on-call” scheduling. If not, think of it as a kind of shift limbo, where employees are told whether or not to report to work a day or less before the scheduled shift. But according to New York’s attorney general this common staffing practice could be criminal, violating New York Labor laws.

According to the New York Times, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sent letters to retailers Friday including Gap, Target, JC Penney, Abercrombie & Fitch, Sears and several others questioning the practice. In the letters Schneiderman wrote:

If the employee is told that his or her services are not needed, the employee will receive no pay for that day. For many workers, that is too little time to make arrangements for family needs, let alone to find an alternative source of income to compensate for the lost pay.

The on-call system currently allows retailers to adjust their staff depending on the projected volume of customers on a given day. These shifts are used as a cost saving measure in order to eliminate potential over-staffing or under-staffing.

In the letters Schneiderman said that the “on-call” practice could be potentially violating a New York law that says employees who report for a scheduled shift on any day have to be paid for at least four hours at the basic minimum hourly wage.

Reuters contacted some accused of the retailers who all invariably denied the allegations writing:

Target said workers are informed of their schedules 10 days before the start of a work week and it does not employ ‘on-call’ shifts. JC Penney said it has a policy against on-call scheduling. The Gap said it is committed to ‘sustainable scheduling practices’ and is conducting research on the matter.

While the U.S. Labor Department is reportedly looking into the matter, the 13 retailers have until May 4 to provide information on how they schedule employee shifts.

As someone who has worked in retail, I can tell you that the last thing you want is an on-call shift. They’re unpredictable and tie up your schedule. When given one of these shifts you’re forced to keep your schedule open in case you might be needed, but if not your wallet is out of luck, and it’s usually too late to make alternate plans. Requiring retailers to pay a minimum wage for workers slighted by these shifts seems only fair. America is ready for retailers and other big businesses to start showing that they respect their workers, and don’t just take them for granted.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post NY Attorney General Questions Legality of On-Call Retail Shifts appeared first on Law Street.

Supplements. They can come in the form of vitamins, minerals, herbs, or amino acids.  My “New Year, new me” brain tells me they’re good for me, but unless they come in cute, chewable gummy form, I’m just not interested. But for more than half of all Americans, taking some form of daily supplement is pretty routine. Do these tiny capsules actually contain what they say they do? The New York Attorney General’s office says no.

In a new investigation, authorities tested top-selling supplement brands from major retailers and found four out of five of the products didn’t even contain their title ingredients. Instead they contained cheap fillers like powdered rice, garlic, mustard, wheat, and asparagus–many of which could be dangerous for people with allergies.

This information is shocking, but not too hard to believe, since the supplement industry operates in a dietary foods gray area, and therefore isn’t too harshly regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Due to the 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act, supplements are considered safe until proven otherwise. Well, apparently we’ve proven otherwise.

In a cease and desist letter sent to GNC, Target, Walgreens, and Wal-Mart, the New York Attorney General’s office demanded these retailers explain how they verify the ingredients in their “adulterated” store brand herbal supplements, as well as take products that weren’t truthful off the shelves.

At Walgreens, investigators discovered the store’s popular brand of supposed “physical endurance enhancing” ginseng pills actually contained powdered garlic and rice. Walmart wasn’t any better–its ginkgo biloba supplements actually contained powdered radish, houseplants, and wheat, despite being listed as “gluten-free.”

What even is ginkgo biloba? Apparently, this medicinal herb boasts the ability to improve blood circulation, memory, cognitive thinking, and according to some, sexual performance. But for those with Celiac disease or other gluten sensitivities, the only thing their Walmart tablets will be improving is their frequency of an upset stomach.

Other supplements to avoid include Target’s ginkgo biloba, St. John’s wort, and valerian root, which all tested negative for the herbs on their labels. GNC’s pills also often unlisted ingredients used as fillers, like powdered legumes, the class of plants that includes peanuts and soybeans. Given the prevalence of nut and soy allergies, this revelation is scary for people with those sensitivities.

The Attorney General’s investigation was prompted by an New York Times article in 2013 that raised questions about widespread labeling fraud in the supplement industry.

Americans don’t like to play around when it comes to their health, so these companies better respond to these allegations swiftly. According to the New York Times, a GNC spokesperson said they would cooperate “in all the appropriate ways,” while Walgreens said it would remove the products from its shelves nationwide, even though only New York State had demanded it. Walmart claimed it would reach out to the suppliers of its pseudo supplements “and take appropriate action.”

Are vitamin supplements even worth the hype? While the ones being sold at these retailers are clearly suspect, the usefulness of vitamins in general is still up for debate. For more information, check out this issues post on the subject.

However, the lack of attention paid to allergy concerns is still the most upsetting thing about this entire scandal. I’m wondering if complaints will start to come out of the woodwork claiming anaphylaxis reactions to these retailers’ products. If so, GNC, Target, Walmart and Walgreens can look forward to some very enjoyable civil suits.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Major Retailers Under Fire for Selling Pseudo Supplements appeared first on Law Street.

One of the big travel trends right now is a site called AirBnB.com. The company was founded in 2008, and the idea is pretty unique. Essentially, it allows people from cities all over the world to rent out rooms, apartments, houses, or even their couches to visitors. The relative costs are beneficial for both the travelers and the hosts, and AirBnB ensures that both sides involved in the transaction have been properly vetted and approved. Customers are also allowed to leave reviews at places they have stayed, creating a community of recommendations and verified great places to rent. This isn’t really even a new idea; in theory, it’s like hosting a friend of a friend in town for a few days in your home. The only difference is that instead of meeting your houseguest through a friend, you connected through the Internet.

Since 2008, AirBnB has hosted over 8.5 million guests, and this innovative online economy does not seem like it will slow down anytime soon. The business is fairly rewarding. According to an interview in the New York Times, a woman in Brooklyn made about $90,000 renting out two bedrooms in her house. AirBnB overall is very lucrative in the state of New York. Over the last three years, the top 100 hosts in New York have grossed a collective $54 million.

The state of New York is less enamored with the idea, and is instead pursuing legal action against the company. There are a few reasons why certain aspects of AirBnB may be illegal. One issue is that by using AirBnB, tourists are not booking hotel rooms. Included in the price of a hotel room is tax, part of which goes to the state. New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is arguing that the AirBnB industry has cost New York millions in tax dollars. Last Friday, his office delivered a subpoena to AirBnB requiring that they disclose the names, locations, and revenue of all of the hosts in the state of New York. The AG’s office claim that they’re not going after the occasional renter, they’re going after those 100 or so hosts that grossed $54 million. A spokesperson for the office, stated, “we began this process in the hopes of collaborating with Airbnb to recover millions of dollars in unpaid taxes and to stop the abuse of Airbnb’s site by operators of illegal hotels. Airbnb isn’t standing up for average New Yorkers who rent out their apartments from time to time — Airbnb is standing up for highly profitable, illegal businesses that make up a huge chunk of its corporate revenue.”

AirBnB disagrees–they have filed a motion in the New York Supreme Court to challenge the subpoena. They claim that Schneiderman doesn’t have any actual evidence of wrongdoing on the site.

There’s also the question of the legality of AirBnB in regards to lease and zoning laws in New York. For example, it is usually legal to rent out your space for less than 30 days, but only if you are home. Some AirBnB hosts are home while their guests occupy an extra bedroom, but many others rent out extra apartments that they lease, or their own apartments while they are out of town for whatever reason. Rules about having guests are not generic—many are contingent on individual leases, bylaws, or building regulations. For example, some buildings may allow guests, but if they stay more than a few weeks, they need to be registered. Some buildings don’t allow the transfer or loaning of the key fobs that allow entrance into the lobby. There are a wide range of rules that govern housing in New York City and other major metro areas, but most do have some constraints on private short-term rentals of property. The chances are that most of the hosts on AirBnB aren’t breaking the law. But the AirBnB moguls in New York City might want to watch out, because this battle could get ugly.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Allen Skyy via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post AirBnB Locked in Battle with New York Attorney General appeared first on Law Street.