Articles Posted in employment attorney

New protections are now in place for workers who are pregnant or nursing. These federal protections were signed into law as the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) and the Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers Act (PUMP Act). As our Los Angeles employment attorneys can explain, these statutes expand previously-established federal laws that protect both pregnant and nursing employees.Los Angeles pregnancy discrimination lawyer

Let’s start with the PWFA, which technically goes into effect in June 2023. The law says that employers with 15+ employees must provide reasonable accommodations to qualified workers/applicants who have temporary physical and/or mental limitations as a result of conditions like pregnancy or childbirth.

As our Los Angeles pregnancy discrimination lawyers can explain, existing federal law does not consider pregnancy a “disability” that entitles a worker to reasonable accommodations. Employers are only required to extend reasonable accommodations for pregnancy, childbirth, or related conditions when similar accommodations are extended to other workers too. The PWFA changes that.

An employee is deemed “qualified” under the PWFA if they have the ability to perform the core functions of the job with those reasonable accommodations. Even if they can’t form a key function of the job for a temporary period of time due to pregnancy, childbirth, or related condition, they may still be qualified if they’ll be able to perform it at some point in the near future AND their current inability to do so isn’t an undue hardship on the employer (similar to the Americans With Disabilities Act).

Also similar to the ADA is the fact that the PWFA compels an interactive process of good faith between all parties in order to identify which accommodations are “reasonable” given the job and the company. Employers aren’t allowed to require workers to take-it-or-leave-it with an accommodation that wasn’t agreed to as a result of that good faith interactive process. Employers also can’t force workers to take leave (paid or unpaid) if some other reasonable accommodation is possible. Asking for a reasonable accommodation on this basis is not a lawful basis for employer retaliation.

Some examples of what may be considered a “reasonable accommodation” under the new law: Continue Reading ›

A California law that prohibits employers from forcing workers to resolve major workplace disputes in private arbitration is a violation of federal statute – according to a recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.Los Angeles employment lawyer

The 2-1 ruling addresses conflict over California’s AB51, which criminalizes the act of an employer forcing an employee to sign an arbitration agreement that would compel them to resolve serious job conflicts before a private arbiter rather than in court.

As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, this outcome is considered a big win for employers and big businesses – and a serious blow to the average worker.

These so-called “mandatory arbitration agreements” require workers to settle their complaints about things like sexual harassment, discrimination, and retaliation in a closed-door, private session – with an arbitration company paid by the employer – rather than in an open, public court proceeding. Arbitrators don’t even necessarily have to follow the law or due process, the way courts are bound. Such agreements had become extremely common in California and throughout the country in recent years, with many companies forcing workers to sign them as a condition of employment.

Those who support mandatory arbitration to resolve workplace disputes say it’s faster and cheaper than court, and makes the most sense when trying to settle routine points of contention. However, labor advocates say such agreements help to hide systemic abuses and discrimination. Arbitration agreements were shown to be particularly problematic in the midst of the #MeToo movement because workers weren’t able to identify their unfair or unlawful treatment as part of a bigger problem as opposed to an isolated incident that impacted only them.

AB51, which went into effect in 2019, attempted to address these concerns. It was passed along with a clutch of several other bills intended to protect workers from sexual harassment, unlawful wage gaps, and inadequate workplace health and safety protections. Continue Reading ›

Artificial Intelligence (better known as AI) has piqued employer interest for its potential in streamlining the hiring process. However, there’s legitimate concern that it can systematically engage in unlawful discriminatory practices in hiring.AI hiring technology bias

At this point, most large employers (about 83 percent – including 99 percent of Fortune 500 firms) use some type of AI automation in facilitating hiring procedures. However, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has raised pointed questions about what these technology platforms and employers are doing to ensure these programs don’t have discriminatory practices baked in.

Just recently, a man filed a California employment discrimination lawsuit against a company who alleges artificial intelligence technology used by many employers have caused him to be systematically discriminated against. According to court records filed in Northern California, the plaintiff – a Black man over 40 who has been diagnosed with both anxiety and depression – has worked in the financial services industry for several years.

The plaintiff says that since 2018, he’s used the technology produced by a company called Workday to apply at somewhere between 80 and 100 jobs in his field. Despite having adequate qualifications and experience for those positions, he’s been outright rejected for all of them. His attorney says that based on his client’s experience and qualifications, he should not be outright rejected for that many positions. The accusation is that this technology has been discriminating against him on the basis of race, age, and disability – all illegal under state and federal employment laws.

As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, artificial intelligence job screening tools are reliant on inputs and algorithms that are created by humans. Whether they realize it or not, human beings have built-in biases. For a qualified candidate to be denied 80 to 100 times does raise some alarm bells about whether the screening practices are discriminatory.

The case raises questions about how heavily companies should be relying on this type of potentially flawed technology when the stakes are so high.

Types of AI Hiring Technology

Among the types of artificial intelligence employers are using as part of the recruiting and hiring process are chat bots, resume scanners, and video interviewing platforms.  Recognizing the potential for problems, the EEOC last year issued some guidance with respect to use of these technologies as it applies to the Americans With Disabilities Act. Some of these programs actually evaluate the facial expressions and speech patterns of a candidate and assign value to these – factors that can create discrimination or perpetuate bias. Continue Reading ›

A judge in Sacramento has halted a California employment law bolstering fast food worker protections that was slated to go into effect Jan. 1, 2023. Los Angeles employment lawyer

The judge’s decision, issued Dec. 30, 2023, was in response to a lawsuit filed by a large restaurant coalition and corporate trade groups seeking to overturn the law, Assembly Bill 257 (aka the FAST Act or Fast Food Recovery Act). The industry group, Save Local Restaurants (which includes half a dozen other large franchise, restaurant, and business associations), submitted a petition signed by 1 million+ California voters to take the issue back to the ballot in November 2024.

Precedent set decades ago with the right of referendum many presuming that the announcement of the petition itself would trigger the state to put a hold on implementing pending legislation as previously planned. However, as our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, the state Department of Industrial Regulations said it intended to proceed as planned with AB 257 – and would pause only if the petition signatures were verified and the referendum was approved, a process that typically takes several weeks. To qualify for referendum, 66 percent of the signatures would need to be verified. The process is still ongoing, but as of this writing, the verification rate is about 76 percent.

When it comes to employment discrimination in California, we tend to presume that the complainants facing unfair treatment are those in the social minority group or otherwise at a systemic disadvantage. And they usually are: Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, women, religious minorities, members of the LGBTQ community, those with darker skin, those born outside of the United States, those who are pregnant, those with disabilities, etc.  These are the individuals most commonly adversely impacted by personal biases and systemic inequalities that bleed into the workplace. employment attorney Los Angeles

That said: State and federal anti-discrimination laws generally do not limit these protections solely to minority groups. For example, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 states it’s an unlawful employment practice for employers to discriminate against employees on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Nowhere does it mention that certain races or religions or genders are the only ones covered by the law.

In other words, as our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, it is entirely possible for a White, Christian, heterosexual, young male born in the U.S. to be a plaintiff in an employment discrimination lawsuit. The key question is going to be: Was the worker treated unfairly on the basis of any of those characteristics? 

California Senate Bill 1162, recently signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, is a broad pay transparency law that requires employers to include pay ranges in all job ads as of Jan. 1, 2023 – a measure that is intended to close the pay gap and prevent unlawful employment discrimination. California pay transparency

Pay transparency employment law is a catching trend. In addition to California, other states like Nevada, Colorado, Washington, Connecticut, Maryland, and Rhode Island do as well. New York passed a similar measure too, but it’s awaiting the governor’s signature (though New York City has its own pay transparency law).

As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, publication of pay for various jobs is supposed to reduce or eliminate discrepancies in pay. It’s effective in this because it brings to light information that employers have historically wished to keep under wraps. (If you encourage employees to stay hush-hush about their salaries because it’s “impolite” or “against company policy” or a “company trade secret,” there’s less chance of them learning if some groups are being unfairly discriminated against in their pay.) It can help employee plaintiffs more easily make their case when pay disparities are clearly spelled out in black-and-white. And by posting the salary upfront in job ads, employers may be less likely to engage in discrimination by low-balling a prospective employee in starting pay on the basis of their protected status (be that race, religion, gender identity, national origin, disability, sexual orientation, age, etc.).

It is against existing law for companies to communicate with other employees about wages – per the National Labor Relations Act and California Labor Code Sections 232(a) and (b). Continue Reading ›

Social media giant Twitter is facing legal action over allegedly laying off more than 950 workers without providing proper notice, as required under the federal and California WARN Act. WARN stands for Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act.California WARN Act

Per the California Department of Industrial Relations, relocations, terminations, and mass layoffs in this state are regulated in Labor Code sections 1400-1408. Generally speaking, most large employers aren’t allowed to order mass layoffs, relocations, or terminations unless the employer provides written notice to employees 60 days prior to the order taking effect. Employers are also required to notify the state’s Employment Development Department. As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, failure to do this can trigger recompense for ex-employees for back pay, the value of any benefits workers may have been entitled to during that time. Companies can obtain an exemption from the law if certain conditions under Labor Code section 1402.5 are met, but that doesn’t appear to have been the case here with Twitter.

Musk’s Rocky Start at Twitter Helm

As it’s been widely-reported, Twitter was recently purchased by Tesla CEO Elon Musk. The acquisition deal had been in the works for months, but was finally sealed Oct. 28th for a $44 billion price tag. At the time, he promised to keep employee benefits and compensation the same.

News soon began to spread that Twitter would begin mass layoffs the first week of November. In an effort to eliminate costs, Twitter axed 50 percent of its workforce, reducing staff by 3,700 positions.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California, alleges the company initiated layoffs starting Nov. 1st, with several employees saying they were in the first wave of mass layoffs, despite not receiving proper written notice in accordance with state and federal employment law.

Of note: It’s not the first time Musk has been accused of violating WARN laws. Continue Reading ›

Age discrimination against workers is nothing new. It’s not unique to California or even to America. Unfair treatment of older workers is a common thread in many societies, with ageism becoming more prevalent in economies that are advancing even as their workforce ages.It’s estimated that by 2030, one quarter of the world’s workforce will be over 55. Orange County age discrimination lawsuit

We’re likely to see a growing number of California age discrimination lawsuits as two of the largest generations – Baby Boomers and Millennials – cross the over-40 threshold. (Baby boomers are currently between 58 and 67, while the Millennials can be as young as 26, but as old as 41.)

What is Age Discrimination?

Allegations of Orange County workplace national origin discrimination at a California-based construction company has led to litigation by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Los Angeles national origin discrimination

The federal lawsuit alleges that for at least the last three years, supervisors at the construction company subjected Latino workers to harassment based on their race and national origin. In some cases, the workers were threatened with sexual assault.

As our Orange county employment attorneys can explain, while racial discrimination and sexual harassment are pretty well understood, national origin discrimination is less so. It involves treating applicants for employment or employees unfavorably on the basis of their actual or perceived place of birth, country of origin, ancestry, native language, accent, or because they are perceived as looking or sounding “foreign.”

In this case, construction workers were reportedly subjected to ongoing harassment in which their co-workers and supervisors referred to them as “wetbacks” and mocked them for not speaking English, and told them to “go back to where you came from.” In the bathrooms, anti-Latino graffiti would cover the walls, including offensive imagery and abusive language.

The Latino workers were also allegedly sexually harassed by co-workers, referred to as derogatory slurs, regularly shown explicit pictures, and threatened with sexual assault. Continue Reading ›

Workplaces that fail to accommodate a worker’s injury or disability may be rightly sued for California employment discrimination.Los Angeles disability discrimination

As explained by the California Department of General Services’ Office of Human Resources, reasonable accommodation refers to logical adjustments made to a job and/or the work environment that enables a person who is disabled to perform the essential functions of that job. Reasonable accommodations don’t change the essential job functions or create jobs that don’t exist. But they are provided when accommodation is necessary to allow a person who is disabled to perform the essential job functions.

Employers have a responsibility to engage in a timely, good faith, interactive process to determine effective reasonable accommodations for employees who are disabled. When they do not, workers can take legal action against them by filing a California employment lawsuit.

That’s what happened in a recent case at a poultry farm in Merced County, Central California. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information