Orange County Employment Lawyers Blog

Sikh Truckers Settle Anti-Discrimination Lawsuit

November 25, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

Four Sikh truckers in California have settled an anti-discrimination lawsuit against their employers who fired them for refusing to cut their hair to undergo a drug test.

In Sikhism, it’s part of a practice called Kesh that allows one’s hair to grow naturally as a matter of respect for the perfection of God’s creation. The idea is to live the way God made you. It is a tightly-held tenant, one of the five articles of faith of the Sikh religion. When refused to have have it clipped for the drug test, his employer fired him. One plaintiff called the incident, which occurred five years ago, “One of the hardest times of my life.”

Now, he and four other trucker applicants will split a $260,000 damage award to resolve allegations of religious discrimination in employment. Continue Reading ›

Sexual Harassment Complaints Plague National Park Service

November 21, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

This summer, the National Park Service celebrated 100 years since its founding. In that time, it’s helped to protect more than 84 million acres of environmental treasures and welcomes 300 million visitors to its sites annually.

But a report that was released this year following the Department of Interior’s Office of Inspector General (IG) released a report following a two-year investigation followed complaints filed by more than a dozen former and current female park service employees who alleged discrimination, retaliation and a sexually-hostile work environment over the course of 15 years in the River District of the Grand Canyon. That report showed that in addition to the 13 women who actually filed complaints, there were 22 others who had been suffering from workplace harassment. Then in late September, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform reviewed that investigation – and a number of others from the IG on other parks – and determined the park service was responsible for a pattern of sexual misconduct and sexual harassment that spanned decades.

Of course, the park service isn’t alone in creating this kind of environment. One recent survey by Comparably found that 24 percent of women reported being sexually harassed at work. Another survey by Cosmopolitan magazine indicated 1 in 3 women is sexually harassed at work. Continue Reading ›

Court: California Doesn’t Require Companies to List PTO on Regular Paychecks

November 17, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

Businesses in California don’t have keep a running tally of paid time off or vacation hours accrued on worker paychecks or wage statements, according to a new state appeals court ruling.

In Soto v. Motel 6 Operating, L.P., plaintiff alleged employer violated California Labor Code section 226, subdivision (a), by not including the monetary amount of vacation pay/ PTO on employees’ wage statements. A three-judge panel for California’s Fourth Appellate District disagreed, affirming the lower court’s ruling in favor of the company after it was sued by a former worker in 2015.

Plaintiff worked for the hotel chain for almost three years, from 2012 to 2015. A few months after she left the company, she brought a representative Private Attorney General Act of 2004 (PAGA) action for a violation of the aforementioned statute. The law says, in part, that every employer shall on a semimonthly basis at the time of payment of wages give each employee an accurate, itemized statement that shows in writing:

Gross wages earned;
Total hours worked (except those based on salary who are exempt from overtime);
Number of piece-rate units earned;
All deductions;
Net wages earned;
Inclusive dates of the period for which employee is paid;
The name of employee and last four digits of his/her social security number with wage statements that set forth “all vacation and PTO wages accrued during the applicable pay period.”

McDonald’s Corp. Settles Wage-and-Hour Class Action, Could Foreshadow Future Liabilities

November 14, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

McDonald’s Corp. continues to insist it isn’t a joint employer of workers employed by franchise restaurants. Nonetheless, it agreed to pay nearly $4 million to settle a lawsuit over the labor law violations of a franchisee – and it’s a move that has many other large companies sitting uneasy.

Attorneys for 800 workers employed at five different restaurants owned by a single franchisee announced in a federal district court in California that the international fast-food chain, based in Illinois, would pay $1.75 million in back pay to the workers and $2 million in legal fees. The class action lawsuit alleged that McDonald’s, alongside its franchisee, Smith Family LP, was in violation of California labor laws for its:

Failure to pay overtime;
Failure to maintain accurate records;
Failure to reimburse workers for time they spent cleaning their uniforms.

Sharif v. United Airlines – FMLA Dispute Ruling Favors Employer

November 11, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

The Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) is a federal statute intended to enable workers who need to take leave for legitimate personal and family needs and medical reasons to do so without retribution. A company that retaliates against a worker for using these guaranteed safety net can be held liable in court and ordered to pay damages to the worker.

In the case of Sharif v. United Airlines, Inc., a plaintiff argued this was exactly what happened to him. However, the employer argued the worker had fraudulently taken FMLA leave in order to extend his vacation and further that he made dishonest representations when the company launched an investigation of it.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ultimately sided with the employer, finding the worker had not established a triable issue of fact that the airline truly fired him for taking leave, rather than fraudulently taking leave and then lying about it. Continue Reading ›

Fredrickson v. Starbucks – 9th Circuit Sends Barista Tips Tax Lawsuit Back to State Court

November 8, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

Starbucks Corp. baristas objecting to company policy to withhold taxes from their pay based on estimated tips – rather than actual tips – will have to take their dispute to state court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided in Fredrickson v. Starbucks Corp. that it lacked subject matter jurisdictions over plaintiff’s claims. Specifically, the federal-state comity doctrine – which is the idea that courts shouldn’t act in a way that demeans the jurisdiction, laws or judicial decisions of another jurisdiction – would prohibit the federal court from awarding any type of damages on the state-tax component of these claims. The federal tax component of the claim couldn’t be severed, justices ruled, so the entire action had to be decided in state court.

It’s a set back for the three plaintiffs, who filed the class action wage dispute lawsuit in Oregon. Continue Reading ›

Google Age Discrimination Lawsuit Approved as “Collective Action”

November 5, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

The California age discrimination lawsuit against tech-giant Google may soon grow exponentially. A federal judge in San Jose recently approved the case’s collective action status. That means certain software engineers over the age of 40 rejected for Google jobs following an in-person interview over the last two years are now able to join the lawsuit. That could mean thousands of additional plaintiffs will be eligible to join the action.

In an artful, 17-page opinion, Judge Beth Labson Freeman posed the question, “How does age factor into one’s Googleyness?” At the heart of the case, plaintiffs seek to expose Google’s hiring practice and larger corporate culture as one that puts a prime value on youth, and considers age a detriment (as opposed to an asset with the benefit of experience).

The age discrimination lawsuit was filed by two former job applicants who were both over 50 when they were turned down for positions at the firm. One woman, a programmer, was brought in for in-person interviews on four separate occasions, and rejected each time. The second plaintiff was interviewed by phone, but was not brought in for an in-person interview. Freeman imposed a limitation on the class of people to those who had an in-person interview. That still means thousands may potentially join this action. Continue Reading ›

New California Labor Law Targets Sexual Harassment, Assault in Janitorial Industry

November 3, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

A new labor law in California seeks to aid janitorial workers in the fight against sexual harassment and sexual assault on-the-job. Assembly Bill 1978 was signed recently by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) with the goal of helping property service workers understand what their rights are and to protect themselves from sexual harassment.

Janitorial employers will now be required to register with the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, which will provide in-person prevention training on sexual violence and sexual harassment for both workers and employers. Workers and supervisors will receive written pamphlets that detail what sexual harassment is and what resources are available if it happens to them. The registration requirement will officially begin July 1, 2018. Those who don’t comply with the statute could face revocation of their license or be required to pay a maximum $10,000 in fines.

Sponsored by Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego), the bill promises to add both transparency and accountability in an industry that typically employs a high number of disadvantaged workers (Latina females in particular) who are vulnerable to sexual harassment and sexual violence because they often work alone, night shifts and fear deportation if they complain. Gonzalez said these workers need appropriate training and protections to ensure their safety and adequate recourse when a crime or legal violation does occur. Continue Reading ›

Smiley v. El DuPont de Nemours & Co. – Company Can’t Use Paid Meal Breaks to Offset Other Compensation

October 29, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

A federal district court was mistaken in granting summary judgment to manufacturer DuPont in a dispute regarding employee overtime claims, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. In Smiley v. El DuPont de Nemours & Co., the appellate panel ruled the company can’t use the compensation it gave workers for meal breaks (which it was not required to do) as an offset for overtime compensation due.

This was true even though the meal break pay during the 12-hour shift often exceeded the 30-to-60 minutes for which workers weren’t paid for donning/ doffing their uniforms and protective gear and conducting “shift relief,” that involved incoming and outgoing workers to share information about the status of the work. The federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) doesn’t authorize this kind of offsetting for overtime compensation, the court ruled, citing its 2005 precedential holding in Wheeler v. Hampton Twp. In that case, the court held that offsetting overtime pay is confined to situations in which employers are paying “extra compensation” at the premium rate of 1.5 times the regular hourly.

According to court records, employees at the plant routinely worked 12-hour shifts. They were required to be on site for a period of time before and after each shift in order to participate in “shift relief” and to don and doff their protective gear and uniforms. Typically in total this took a half hour to an hour. Continue Reading ›

Diabetic Fired Over $1.69 Drink Awarded $277,565 in Employment Lawsuit

October 26, 2016 | by Nassiri Law

Many companies – particularly those that serve or sell any kind of food or beverages – may have strict policies about when and where employees can consume those goods and how they must pay for them. However, there may be some cases when a physical condition or illness may necessitate a reasonable accommodation that deviates from such policies. This was the case in EEOC v. Dolgen corp, LLC, dba Dollar General Corporation, recently before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee.

The worker in this case was a cashier who was also a diabetic who was insulin-dependent. This condition is also referred to as Type 1 diabetes, and it occurs when the body fails to produce insulin, which is the hormone the body needs to get glucose – the simple sugar used for energy, derived from sugars and starches. A condition called hypoglycemia, also known as low blood sugar, can arise when the level of glucose in the bloodstream drops below normal. Symptoms can range from being shaky to dizzy to weak or irritable to losing consciousness or having seizures. It can even be deadly if not treated right away.

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, plaintiff had previously informed her supervisor that she was a diabetic and asked on several occasions that her supervisor let her keep a sugary drink, such as juice, near the register to help prevent a hypoglycemic episode. Her supervisor would later testify at trial that it was company policy not to allow cashiers to keep any food or drinks near the register, as it did not allow “grazing” by cashiers. However, the company did have a reasonable accommodation policy that could have allowed the worker to keep her drink near the register. Problem was that for whatever reason, the workers at this particular store – including the management – were unaware of this policy. Continue Reading ›