Articles Posted in gender discrimination

California law protects both transgender and pregnant workers, but rarely do employment law cases combine the two. Recently in New Jersey, a transgender man filed an employment lawsuit against Amazon alleging he was harassed and turned down for a promotion after revealing his pregnancy to his employer. Los Angeles LGBT employment lawyer

According to NBC News, the man informed his boss about the pregnancy in the summer of last year. His boss disclosed this information to other managers, and word spread throughout the facility. Soon, other warehouse workers were bullying and harassing him about using the men’s bathroom. Suddenly, his work performance came under fire. He was placed on paid leave after complaining to human resources. When he returned, he learned he’d been demoted to a position of “item picker,” which required him to lift heavy items on a routine basis. At that point, he told HR that the weight lifting requirements were causing him pain in his abdomen. Again, he was placed on paid leave and told to acquire a doctor’s recommendation for pregnancy-related accommodations. He did so, he said, but was denied.

He was then offered a promotion at a different facility – one that would have granted him a reprieve from the people harassing him – but that was later rescinded and he was fired. His termination came the same month he was to give birth. He now alleges gender discrimination and pregnancy discrimination, and is seeking recovery of lost wages and benefits as well as coverage of legal fees and punitive damages. Continue Reading ›

Pinterest, a $21 billion company that markets mostly to women on its virtual pinboards, is accused by its former chief operating officer of rampant sexism, harassment, retaliation and wrongful termination. She alleges she was fired for speaking out about disparate treatment between female and male top executives. Orange County gender discrimination lawyer

As The New York Times reports, the former COO says in her San Francisco Superior Court lawsuit that she was excluded out of key meetings, given professional feedback that was highly gendered and she was paid less than her male peers when she was first brought on. She learned the pay disparity after the company filed to go public last year. She talked about how decisions were often made in informal discussions among male colleagues; the “meeting after the meeting.” Despite being the No. 2 executive, she said she endured a culture of constant exclusion. When she ultimately spoke up about it, she said, she was dismissed (the dispute compared to a domestic squabble), maligned (told she wasn’t working collaboratively enough) and ultimately fired.

As our Orange County gender discrimination lawyers can explain, this type of discriminatory action in the upper echelons of corporate America may look slightly different than at other levels, particularly as it can be more subtle. But one thing our employment lawyers have noted no matter the pay grade is that workers who speak out about unfair treatment may find themselves may find themselves a target of demotion, loss of benefits or firing. This in itself is an illegal act called retaliation. Continue Reading ›

A prominent, national law firm is facing a growing number of lawsuits pertaining to its secretive compensation system that former attorneys say hides systematic pay discrimination against women. Some of those include claims, filed in 2018, included plaintiffs who worked for the firm in California, as the ABA Journal reported. gender discrimination

In that case, the lawsuit alleges there was an enforced “code of silence” with regard to pay and productivity wherein partners kept compensation information confidential. That left female attorneys out in the cold, unable to discover or attempt to equalize their pay. Guidelines at the firm were reportedly changed to discourage – but not outright forbid – discussions of pay among partners and employees.

Recently, a U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied the law firm’s motion to dismiss these lawsuit, though the court did dismiss several of the pregnancy discrimination claims. Continue Reading ›

The 1963 Equal Pay Act mandates that employers must provide equal pay for equal work. The express purpose was to eliminate the practice of paying women less simply because of their gender. The law does allow employers to offer an affirmative defense to the law if they can show that some factor other than one’s gender played a role in lower pay. The question recently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Rizo v. Yovino was whether a California math teacher/consultant’s past salary qualified as a “factor other than sex” that allowed the school district to legally pay her less than her male counterparts. On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the appellate court ruled that it is not. California Equal Pay violation

In other words, the school district can’t use one’s prior salary as an excuse to pay them less. The court ruled that to allow employers to pay workers less solely based on the pay of a previous employer would essentially defeat the purpose of the federal Equal Pay law and perpetuate gender inequities in pay. As our Los Angeles equal pay lawyers can explain, fact that women have been paid less ion the past isn’t justification to continue paying them less.

Several other federal appellate courts have held that if defendants in an equal pay case present a “factor other than sex” defense, that factor has to be job-related. Only one court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, has held that the defense can involve any number of essentially limitless other factors, so long as none of them involves the employee’s gender. Continue Reading ›

Pregnancy discrimination remains an ongoing problem in workplaces throughout the U.S. and California. Women make up half the workforce, and almost 85 percent of them will become mothers at some point during their careers. And yet, as our Los Angeles pregnancy discrimination lawyers have seen time and again, pregnancy and childbirth are treated as if they are some kind of deviation from the norm. That’s because many workplaces are constructed around the arcane idea that the ideal worker is male. Los Angeles pregnancy discrimination lawyer

An employer commits pregnancy discrimination when taking adverse action on the basis of an employee’s pregnancy, childbirth or condition related to pregnancy or childbirth. Some pregnancy-related medical conditions may include:

  • Gestational diabetes
  • Hyperemesis gravidarum
  • Preeclampsia

Pregnant workers with these conditions are entitled to reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Food Service Industry Pregnancy Discrimination

Continue Reading ›

As an employee in California, you have rights under both state and federal law that protect you from harassment and discrimination based on your belonging to a protected classification. For example, if you are a woman paid substantially less than male colleagues doing the same work, that’s a form of gender discrimination on the basis of sex – a protected class. Los Angeles employment lawyer

In fielding hundreds of inquiries over the years from California workers whose rights are being violated on-the-job, our Los Angeles employment attorneys want to ensure as many people as possible understand what exactly harassment, discrimination and retaliation is and how to best address it.

What is Workplace Discrimination? 

Discrimination is adverse treatment by an employer against workers who fall into a protected class. California employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees on the basis of:

  • Race
  • Color
  • National origin
  • Religion
  • Gender (including pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions)
  • Disability
  • Age
  • Citizenship status
  • Genetic information
  • Marital status
  • Sexual orientation
  • Gender identity/expression
  • AIDS/HIV
  • Military/veteran status
  • Status as a victim of domestic violence, stalking or assault

This is much more extensive than the federal law, and some cities in California have their own rules that extend protections even further. Continue Reading ›

A new study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reveals that sexual harassment, verbal abuse and gender discrimination are the catalysts mostly responsible for the high rates of burnout among female doctors.doctor gender discrimination

Physicians in general have high rates of burnout, defined just this year by the World Health Organization as a condition characterized by cynicism, emotional exhaustion, physical fatigue and reduced productivity resulting from unmanaged job-related stress. What this new study suggests is the problem is even greater for doctors who are women, and surgical residents in particular.

Another recent survey conducted by physician staffing firm Merritt Hawkins showed that more than three-quarters of female physicians responded in the affirmative when asked whether they had experienced gender-based discrimination in the workplace. Continue Reading ›

Working mothers in California will soon have stronger support for workplace lactation accommodation. Starting Jan. 1, 2020, employers must provide lactating mothers with a place that is private, secure and close to their workstation in order to pump. Additionally, the room must be equipped with a chair as well as a table or shelf to store their pumping equipment, along with access to electricity, running water and a refrigerator or cooler in which to store their milk. These must all be close to their workstation. lactation accommodation lawyer

As our Los Angeles employment attorneys have been made aware, too many new mothers have been forced to express milk in a restroom, closet, vehicle or other location that isn’t ideal. Research shows that lack of a proper lactation space is especially a hardship among lower-income workers of color.

This new measure mandates companies to inform their workers of their right to express breast milk on-the-job, as well as provide the space and adequate time for it. Any violations of these rights must be reported to the state’s Labor Commissioner’s Office. Continue Reading ›

A proposed class action lawsuit alleges banks, insurance companies, investment firms and loan officers were able to discriminate against older, female prospective new hires and customers using Facebook Inc.’s targeted ad platforms. The complaint, filed in San Francisco federal court, insists the company allowed financial service and other advertisers target their ads to certain consumers on the basis of age and gender – even though the company has already been taken to task for similar discriminatory ad practices.employment discrimination

If it’s proven that this violated civil rights and employment rights laws, Facebook could be vulnerable to paying billions in damages to users across the country.

An attorney for the plaintiffs told Reuters the relative novelty of the internet doesn’t usurp the civil rights and employment law protections that Americans enjoy. A spokeswoman for Facebook said the company is taking the time to review the complaint, and expressed pride with the gains the social media giant has made on this front over the last few years. Continue Reading ›

A federal judge in California has ruled that plaintiffs in a gender discrimination lawsuit against Walmart Inc. must file their cases individually, rather than altogether in class action litigation. The decision wasn’t especially surprising, given a similar ruling made by a federal court in Florida earlier this year. Although this will create challenges for the individual plaintiffs, it could ultimately mean higher damage awards for some of the individuals. gender discrimination lawyer

This case, Renati v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., involved of a group of 18 women who had originally been part of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of Dukes et al v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., which certified a class of 1.5 million workers (more than any other in history), all asserting that the retail giant was in violation of Title VII for disparate pay and benefits to female workers compared to their male counterparts. Women alleged that not only were they paid less than men, they were also overlooked for promotions and raises that were handed over to men less-qualified. One plaintiff was reportedly told that a certain position she sought was “a guy’s job.”

However, the SCOTUS reversed itself on the class certification issue in 2011, finding that while all the women shared the same cause of action predicated on gender discrimination claims, there was no common practice, policy or set of facts applicable to all plaintiffs. There was simply too much variation from case-to-case. Therefore, cases would have to be filed either individually or in smaller groups. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information