Orange County Employment Lawyers Blog

California Ban on “No Rehire” Clauses Will Likely Lead to More Retaliation Claims

January 26, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

California may see an increase in workplace retaliation claims since Assembly Bill 749 , which bans no-rehire clauses with limited exception in employment dispute settlements, was enacted this month.

Prior to the passage of this bill, it was common practice for companies to settle discrimination or harassment claims with employees with a settlement that included a no-rehire clause. These provisions can vary in scope, but usually indicated that any future application for employment by that person wouldn’t be considered, and if the worker was hired by chance, he or she would be terminated automatically.

The California Chamber of Commerce had argued the law wasn’t necessary because there were already existing laws against overly-broad no-rehire clauses (specifically, Business and Professional Code section 16600).

The new law, codified in the California Code of Civil Procedure section 1002.5, indicates that no agreement to settle an employment dispute should contain any provision that prohibits, prevents or otherwise restricts an aggrieved person who is settling from obtaining future employment with that employer or any parent company, division, affiliate, subsidiary or contractor. Companies can include no-rehire provisions in cases where the company made a good faith determination that the person signing committed sexual harassment or sexual assault OR where there was a legitimate (i.e., non-discriminatory, non-retaliatory) reason for firing that person. There is also an exclusion for severance agreements. Continue Reading ›

California Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Alleges Firing After Cancer Diagnosis

January 24, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

Even though there have been significant strides in cancer awareness, treatment and survivor rates, people with cancer still experience barriers to equal workplace opportunities. Employees too often face California disability discrimination due to misconceptions about their ability to work during and after receiving cancer treatment.

Yet another example of this was recently reported by The Fresno Bee, which detailed the story of a Tulare woman who is suing her former employer, a ranch and beef company, for allegedly firing her after she took medical leave while undergoing chemotherapy. She had worked at the company for two decades and had been diagnosed with breast cancer.

As our Los Angeles disability discrimination lawyers understand it, plaintiff is alleging a range of civil rights violations under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, breaches of the state’s Unfair Business Practices Act and wrongful termination. Continue Reading ›

U.S. Supreme Court to Rule on Employment Discrimination at Church-Run Schools

January 22, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

The U.S. Supreme Court is slated to consider how federal employment discrimination laws should be applied to church-run schools.

Although our Los Angeles employment discrimination attorneys can for certain how the verdict will go, but we do know that in recent cases weighing the church-and-state relationship, the court has tended recently to side with religious groups.

The cases that the court heart last month deal with another aspect of this same divide: The role the government can or should play in the regulation of religious institutions, particularly if they are receiving taxpayer funding. Both cases were filed by teachers in California Catholic schools accused of employment discrimination. The schools insist that the teachers’ positions fall under the court-established “ministerial exception” to job discrimination. The court will be asked to consider just how broad that exception really is and how to balance the competing interests of shielding workers from discrimination and steering clear of meddling in the affairs of religious organizations. Continue Reading ›

Restaurant Server Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Settled for Nearly $19k

January 20, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

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.

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

Wage Theft Lawsuits Harder to File Under Trump, But California Protections Remain Strong

January 19, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

The Trump administration recently loosened labor law protections by making it more difficult for franchise employees to sue corporations for wage theft under the joint employer rule. Those who work for subcontractors and staffing agencies will have a tougher time securing legal remedy for labor law violations. The new rule issued by the Department of Labor also makes it more challenging to prove that a corporation is responsible for the labor law violations committed by franchise owners and contractors.

The new rule, which is no surprise having been on the table since last April, are enacted under the administration’s supposition that reducing corporate regulation will stimulate economic growth. It’s been praised by business groups, but worker advocates and unions sharply oppose it.

Central to this rule was the question of whether a corporation can be considered the “joint employer” of a worker for a franchise. There have been numerous cases wherein large companies have been sued for labor law violations – including wage theft – that was committed by the owner of a franchise. What this rule does is set a higher standard for “joint employer.” As our Los Angeles wage theft lawyers can explain, the new rule stipulates that companies are considered joint employers only if they:

Hire
Fire
Supervise
Set pay
Maintain employment records

California’s Sexual Harassment Training Law Not in Effect Until 2021

January 17, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

Sexual harassment training was supposed to be mandatory for virtually all employees in California as of Jan. 1, 2020. That was thanks to Senate Bill 1343, which was passed in September 2018. However, that date has been pushed back to Jan. 1, 2021 because of SB 778, which state lawmakers quietly passed in August. SB 778 pushed back the implementation of SB 1343 by a full year.

You’d be forgiven for being mistaken and not realizing employers had another full year before they are mandated to be in compliance. CapRadio was. In a correction, the media outlet wrote, “(SB 778) came with no announcements or notification from the lawmaker’s office.”

That said, our Los Angeles sexual harassment lawyers would encourage companies to that haven’t already begun the process may want to explore how to do so this year so there aren’t any surprises with compliance issues in 2021. The more your workers understand about sexual harassment and your company policies for dealing with it, the more likely it can be appropriately handled from the start (which means better morale for your workers and less chance of litigation for you). It will also allow you to be prepared well ahead of time so your company isn’t scrambling last-minute to comply. Continue Reading ›

Should Amway Sellers be Classified – And Paid – As Employees?

January 15, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

A worker for Amway, a multi-level marketing company that sells home, health and beauty care products, is suing the company and alleging he and other sellers should be classified and paid as employees, rather than independent contractors.

Our Los Angeles employee misclassification attorneys are watching this case closely because it could impact a host of other similar types of business models, such as LuLaRoe, Young Living, Scentsy, Rodan + Fields, Avon Products, Herbalife and others.

Amway sells products like detergent and mouthwash, promoting itself as a means for sellers to become “small business owners.” They thrive on person-to-person sales. These types of companies have come under fire for reportedly predatory business models that require salespersons to buy several hundred or thousand dollars in products just to get started. In some cases, individuals have drained their savings and retirement accounts. The Federal Trade Commission has issued warnings about these types of pyramid schemes, but the companies remain in business.

Most of these companies refer to their salespersons as independent “participants,” “distributors” or “contractors.” But are they?

Not according to the plaintiff in the latest California employment lawsuit against Amway. Continue Reading ›

California Age Discrimination a Problem From the Time Employer Learns of Age

January 13, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

A new study found that job discrimination began for over-40 applicants as soon as their age became known by the employer.

The analysis, conducted by economists for the National Bureau of Economic Research in San Francisco, indicated that when workers applied in person for a position, they were “substantially” less likely to land that job than those who applied online. Researchers theorized the reason was the online applications didn’t ask job candidates for their age, and thus that information didn’t become apparent until the hiring entity has already had time to give at least initial consideration to candidates on the basis of their skills.

Ultimately, older workers in both scenarios still face age discrimination. However, at least a candidate who makes it to the interview stage has had an opportunity to highlight their desirability has an employee without age as a factor. And as our Los Angeles age discrimination lawyers point out, candidates who make it to the later stages of the interview process and are then denied may have an easier time proving discriminatory hiring practices. Continue Reading ›

“Ok Boomer” Went From Meme to U.S. Supreme Court in Age Discrimination Dispute

January 12, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

Is saying, “Ok, boomer” a form of age discrimination? The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing the possibility. While we await a decision, companies may want to be wary of workers tossing the phrase around.

The pithy catchphrase went viral last year as a means of taking a dig at older generations – specifically the perception that aging individuals tend to be more judgmental, narrow-minded and rigidly conservative. Recently, while considering an age discrimination lawsuit, Chief Justice John Roberts, himself a baby boomer (those born between 1946 and 1964), asked hypothetically whether use of the phrase said during the hiring process would constitute age discrimination.

The case in question involves an older government employee who alleges she was discriminated against because of her age. When Roberts asked the question, the somber mood within the courtroom lightened as many chuckled. However, the plaintiff’s employment attorney did seize on it to make a serious point, noting that the use of ethnic slurs in the hiring process could easily be construed as evidence of age discrimination – why not a quip like, “Ok, boomer”? Continue Reading ›

Disneyland Workers Sue for Minimum Wage Pay

January 10, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

Workers at Disneyland in Anaheim, CA are done with the fun and games – at least when it comes to being allegedly underpaid. The California minimum wage lawsuit says the park’s employees aren’t being a living wage. As a result, many have been forced to sleep in their cars, struggle to feed their families and keep up with basic necessities.

In the Orange County Superior Court lawsuit, the workers accuse the Walt Disney Corporation of unfair business practices and unlawful conduct. The minimum wage in the City of Anaheim is $15-an-hour by ordinance (it’s currently $12 hourly in the state of California).

The plaintiffs, representing some 400 employees at the park, are pursuing back wages, restitution and damages.

Our Orange County wage and hour lawyers aren’t the least bit surprised to hear this. A survey conducted of 5,000 Disney workers two years ago revealed that nearly 75 percent of the company’s employees don’t earn enough in wages to cover basic expenses every month. More than 50 percent said they’d been evicted from their homes. Two-thirds reported they weren’t sure where their next meal was coming from.

So why now? Continue Reading ›