Orange County Employment Lawyers Blog

Are Tip Pools Legal in California Workplaces?

May 25, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

Much debate in recent years has centered on whether American workers in certain industries should be compelled to continue their reliance on tipped wages. There are roughly 5.5 million such workers, and their non-tipped wages often fall far below both the federal and state minimum wages. They may also be subject to tip pools.

As noted by the California Labor Commissioner’s Office, a “tip” is money left by a customer over the actual amount due for the services or goods they received. That money belongs to the worker(s) – not the employer.

Workers who rely on tipped wages are often (understandably) very protective of them. Tipping pools, which compel workers to share those tips with fellow employees, are not favored among tipped workers.

In California, tip pooling is legal as long as it is done in compliance with state and federal laws. However, there are specific rules and regulations regarding tip pooling that employers must follow in order to avoid violating workers’ rights.

Under California law, employers are allowed to require employees to participate in a tip pool, where tips are collected and distributed among employees who provide direct table service to customers. However, employers are not allowed to take any portion of the tips for themselves or use them for any purpose other than distributing them to eligible employees. Continue Reading ›

California Racial Discrimination Alleged by Black Doctor at Large Healthcare System

May 21, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

The implicit bias and racial disparities in health care are well-documented. In America, Black people are likely to get sicker and die earlier than other racial groups – largely because they receive lower quality (and quantity) health care than white counterparts. But according to a recent California racial discrimination employment lawsuit, the patients aren’t the only ones treated disparately.

According to recent court filings, the case in question involves an internationally renowned eye doctor for children – the first and only Black doctor to chair a department in the Palo Alto Medical Foundation area of Sutter Health, one of the largest hospital systems in California. A longtime employee, he alleges that racism in the workplace resulted in his being the subject of repeated derogatory comments, as well as reductions in salary and demotions.

He referred to the racism he suffered as “they type that hits you in the back of the head when you don’t see it coming.” Continue Reading ›

Filing Your Own California Employment Lawsuit vs. a CRD Investigation/Remedy

May 10, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

If believe you have been subject to employment discrimination, harassment, wrongful termination, or retaliation at work, your path to justice can go one of two ways: Filing your own lawsuit or handing the case over the California Civil Rights Department. Sometimes, you opt for the latter and might still end up suing, but you could also skip the state’s involvement and go straight to court.

How do you decide which route to go?

You might be best served by scheduling a free consultation with at least one or possibly a couple of Los Angeles employment attorneys. Have the basic facts of your case ready to run through. They can’t give you legal advice unless/until they are hired, but they can probably provide you with information to help you make an informed choice about which option makes the most sense in your case. And these conversations are confidential.

Do I Have to File a Complaint With Human Resources?

In some situations, yes.

Doing so may not be necessary if the company refused to hire you. It also may not be necessary if you were discriminated against based on your position in a protected class (race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, disability, gender/gender identity, sexual orientation, age over 40, pregnancy or related condition, etc.).

However, it may depend on the particulars of your situation and whether part of your claim involves harassment and/or retaliation. Continue Reading ›

After-Acquired Evidence Can’t be Used as a Catch-All Defense in California Employment Lawsuit

May 3, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

It’s common practice for employers accused of discrimination against their workers to try to dig up dirt about the workers’ past – anything that might help bolster their case. But can the evidence acquired after the employee had been disparately treated be used to justify those actions?

“After-acquired evidence” is proof of employee misconduct that an employer discovers after the employee’s been discharged on other grounds (often after an California employment lawsuit has been filed). Courts have debated for years whether such evidence can be used as a defense in employment litigation.

A few years ago, the California Supreme Court significantly limited the use of the defense in employment discrimination cases.

The instructive case our Los Angeles employment lawyers refer to when this question arises is Salas v. Sierra Chemical Co. In this matter, plaintiff sued his former employer under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, alleging the company failed in its legal obligation to accommodate his physical disability and refused to rehire him in retaliation for filing a workers’ compensation claim.

After this claim was filed, the employer was made aware of information indicating that the plaintiff had used someone else’s Social Security number in order to gain employment in the first place. The employer used this to file a motion for summary judgment in its favor. The trial court initially denied this motion, but than issued an alternative write effectively granting it – an action the appellate court affirmed. The California Supreme Court, however, reversed. Continue Reading ›

California Court: Employer Not Liable for Boss’s Sexual Texts to Employee

April 30, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

There was no question the text messages crossed the line. A drug store supervisor sent them to a subordinate employee – one a picture of his genitals and another of him engaged in a sexual act. But was the employer liable for sexual harassment?

As Los Angeles sexual harassment lawyers, exchanges like this are huge red flags that no employer should ignore. But from a legal standpoint, the question when it comes to employer liability for such actions is: What was the response? Were the complaints taken seriously and investigated in good faith? Did the company protect the supervisor or was their adequate accountability? Was the subordinate’s safety taken into account or were they left to fend for themselves? Did the company retaliate against the reporting employee?

In the recent case of Atalla v. Rite Aid Corporation et al., the California Court of Appeal for the Fifth Appellate District ruled in favor of the employer, finding that the acts that led to alleged sexual harassment stemmed from a relationship that was entirely private and separate from the supervisor-subordinate dynamic. Further, the employer – once notified of the incident – did conduct an investigation, fire the supervisor, invite the employee to return to her job, and offer her paid counseling.

According to court records in the case, the plaintiff, a pharmacy intern, and her boss were close friends. In fact, they had a pre-existing friendship before she started working for the company that had no connection to the job. They had regular, candid, and familiar interactions on a wide range of topics. They frequently talked on the phone and texted with each other – not just about work, but their families, food, other people, pets, exercise, vacations, alcohol, etc. They also had regular, in-person interactions with each other, meeting up for birthday dinners, holidays, lunches, and coffee. The exchange in question was sent by the supervisor to the subordinate outside of the workplace and not during work hours.

Soon after receiving those messages, plaintiff’s employment lawyer sent a letter to the company’s human resources division, alleging sexual harassment and saying she wouldn’t return to work. An attorney for the employer spoke to plaintiff’s attorney, and the incident was immediately investigated. HR met with the supervisor, who confessed to sending the messages. he was suspended, informed of the company’s anti-retaliation policy, and then ultimately fired.

The sexually explicit text messages were undoubtedly inappropriate, but were they work-related? Was there evidence the sender was acting in his capacity as supervisor when he sent them? Continue Reading ›

California Pregnancy Discrimination Claim Fails When Court Rules Job Stress Reduction Not Reasonable Accommodation

April 26, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

A California pregnancy discrimination lawsuit failed when both a trial and appellate court agreed that a requested accommodation for job stress reduction was not “reasonable” for an employee working in a high-demand role at a non-profit domestic violence shelter.

Before we dive into why the court decided as it did (and why this same accommodation request might be reasonable in another job post), our Los Angeles pregnancy discrimination lawyers should explain that legal protections against pregnancy discrimination are first and foremost rooted in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex – which includes pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions (current, past, or potential pregnancy, medical conditions related to pregnancy/childbirth/lactation, having/not having an abortion and use of birth control, etc.).

There’s also the Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, which protects against discrimination on the basis of disability. Although pregnancy isn’t a disability, some pregnant workers may have impairments related to their pregnancy that constitute a disability that entitles the worker to reasonable accommodations at work.

Myths About California Wrongful Termination Claims

April 18, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

As Los Angeles employment lawyers, we’re aware of a number of significant misconceptions that people have regarding wrongful termination claims.

It is not simply enough that a firing be unfair or rooted in reasons that are unfounded. In order for California wrongful termination claims to prevail, the termination must have occurred in contrast to federal or state anti-discrimination laws, labor laws, whistleblower laws, or employment contracts. These are not as easy to prove as people think.

We recognize that many aspects of employment law are convoluted, which contributes to the confusion. Here, we want to break down some of the top California wrongful termination claim myths that are most pervasive.

Myth: Wrongful termination applies to any unfair firing.

California, like so many other states, allows for at-will employment. That means you can be fired at any time and for any reason – or none at all. It doesn’t have to be fair. The boss’s son might get away with talking on his cell phone during work hours – but you get fired for the same offense. That’s not necessarily illegal. Where it crosses the legal line (usually) is when it’s discriminatory – on the basis of one’s gender, race, religion, nationality, ethnicity, disability, age, etc. It’s also illegal to fire workers for blowing the whistle on unsafe practices or in violation of the terms of one’s employment contract.

Myth: Only women and minorities can sue for wrongful termination.

Not so. Any person who belongs to a protected class can sue if they are being treated unfairly on the basis of there presence in that class or suspected presence or association with someone else in that class. For example, if a person is fired because they married someone who is Jewish, they may have a claim for employment discrimination and/or wrongful termination. Also, any worker whose employment contract was violated in the course of that firing may have a claim as well. If you cooperate with an OSHA investigation, you can’t be legally fired for that, as it would be considered retaliation. Continue Reading ›

Feds Push for National Non-Compete Clause Ban – Similar to California’s Existing Protections

April 11, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

Non-compete clauses (also called California non-compete agreements) affect roughly 25 percent of the U.S. working population – but they aren’t enforceable in California. Meanwhile, they’re a major issue for workers throughout the rest of the country. But that could soon change.

For those who may be unfamiliar, a non-compete clause is a type of employment contract that prohibits employees from accepting new job opportunities for a period of time after leaving the employer with whom they have the contract. They’re usually limited to similar lines of work and/or competing businesses within a certain geographic area.

While this is less of an issue for workers whose jobs are highly technical and well-paid, these same provisions can be very tough on lower-paid workers. One analysis showed that more than half of workers who sign non-compete clauses are non-salaried, hourly wage workers – about 15 percent of them earning less than $40,000 annually.

Non-compete clauses can also ban workers from:

Launching their own company in the same or similar industry.
Reaching out to former customers.
Using the skillsets you acquired on the job.
Publicly discussing whistleblower actions.
Revealing or making money from the employer’s trade secrets.

While some of these are more reasonable than others (ex-employees revealing trade secrets would be a problem for any employer), others risk stifling free markets.

Recently, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission proposed a new rule that would ban employers from imposing non-compete clauses on workers, calling the practice exploitative. If the rule goes into effect, it could potentially expand job opportunities for some 30 million Americans and increase wages by as much as $300 billion annually. Continue Reading ›

Are California Employers Required to Reimburse for Remote Office Expenses?

April 4, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

The surge in remote work arrangements had led to questions about the kinds of expenses for which California employers are responsible and which they aren’t.

The trend of remote work was already climbing before the pandemic hit, with 43 percent of workers saying they worked from home at least some of the time. According to the Pew Research Center, about 60 percent of workers say their jobs can be done from home all or most of the time. Most were already working from home before the pandemic. Currently, more than than half of workers who have a physical job site say they are choosing to work remotely.

Employers have become more open to telework where possible – not the least of which because it saves them all kinds of expenses. Not only are they saving on commercial real estate expenses, there’s increased productivity (fewer distractions and less tardiness and absenteeism), fewer workers’ compensation claims, broader talent pools to choose from, and higher employee retention rates.

But to what extent are employers required to cover in-home office expenses for remote employees? Continue Reading ›

Mocking of Disabled Workers Can Be Evidence in California Employment Disability Discrimination Claim

March 30, 2023 | by Nassiri Law

When people in a workplace feel comfortable mocking those who are different, those taunts can be used as evidence of harassment in a future California employment disability discrimination claim. Although our interests as Los Angeles employment attorneys are focused on the rights and well-being of the wronged workers, a recent public exchange between the owner of a Twitter and a disabled employee is a prime example for companies of what not to do, encourage, or allow.

As noted by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), federal law holds it is illegal to “harass” a job applicant or employee due to current or past disability – actual or perceived. Harassment can mean offensive remarks about a person’s disability, and it’s characterized by conduct that is so frequent or severe it creates a hostile work environment or results in an adverse employment decision (such as firing or demotion). Harassment can come from a co-worker, supervisor, or even client/customer (when the employer doesn’t intervene).

Disability discrimination harassment can be difficult to prove because it’s often he-said-she-said. There’s no paper trail. But not so for the recent exchange between Twitter owner Elon Musk and a former employee, a 45-year-old Icelandic graphic designer with muscular dystrophy. Continue Reading ›