Orange County Employment Lawyers Blog

Arlington v. Miller’s Trucking – Oral Wage Agreement Weighed

March 15, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

Verbal employment agreements – including those pertaining to wages – are legal and valid. However, they can be tough to prove, which is why it’s always better to get those facts in writing.

Failure to do so may result in an a greater uphill battle in court, though they may not be impossible to prove with enough circumstantial evidence.

The recent case of Arlington v. Miller’s Trucking, Inc., before the Montana Supreme Court, a truck driver sued his former employer claiming he was owed wages in accordance with a verbal employment agreement, and further he was not properly paid overtime. Although a hearing officer with the state labor department issued findings favoring the employer and the district court affirmed, the state supreme court reversed in part, sending portions of the case back to the lower courts for further consideration.

Flood v. Bank of Am. Corp. – Bisexuality Discrimination Lawsuit Revived

March 13, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

Although sexual identity is not explicitly protected on the federal level for public employees, California law does provide protection, as do some local-level policies.

LGBT employees have the right to enjoy a harassment-free, discrimination-free work environment.

In the recent case of Flood v. Bank of Am. Corp., before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, an employee asserted she received disparate treatment because of her bisexuality. She stopped reporting to work for this reason, and was subsequently fired. She sued under a state human rights law (this occurred in Maine), and the bank was granted summary judgment by the district court. However, the federal appeals court reversed on the portions of her claim pertaining to hostile work environment and wrongful termination, finding a reasonable jury could find the bank’s reason for firing the worker was pretextual and was actually due to her bisexuality. That means the plaintiff now gets a crack at a trial.

Adams v. CDM Media USA – Age Discrimination Lawsuit to Proceed

March 12, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

The Hawaii Supreme Court has reversed a summary judgment favoring a company accused of age discrimination in hiring, finding the company failed to meet the necessary burden to prove it should prevail as a matter of law.

The 59-year-old plaintiff who had decades of experience in sales was turned down for a sales position, while jobs were offered to candidates who were between 20 and 35 years her junior. Trial court initially ruled plaintiff failed to prove the reasons cited by defendant company were a pretext for the actual, discriminatory reason it chose not to hire her.

Although that decision was affirmed by the appellate court, the state supreme court in its review of Adams v. CDM Media USA, Inc. reversed, noting the company failed to satisfy its burden to produce a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for declining to hire plaintiff – particularly when it hired candidates with far less experience.

$415M Wage-Fixing Settlement Nearing for California Tech Firms

March 9, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

A U.S. District judge in northern California has not objected to a $415 million settlement, following allegations several large technology firms conspired in a wage-fixing scheme that held salaries down for many workers.

Previously, that same judge had rejected a $325 million proposed settlement, saying it was far too low. The settlement still has to be approved, but that seems more likely now with the higher sum.

Plaintiffs had asserted Adobe Systems Inc., Apple Inc., Intel Corp. and Google Inc. together made an agreement that they would not poach employees form the other. The problem with an agreement like this is that, especially when you’re dealing with the major players in a given industry, such action can significantly limit job mobility. As a result, it means employees have little bargaining power when it comes to their salaries.

Age Discrimination May Manifest in Subtle Ways

March 6, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

Most employers are aware of the fact that legally, they can’t specifically recruit workers under the age of 30 or fire a worker simply because he or she hit the 55-year mark. But usually, age discrimination comes in much more subtle ways.

One such example is job advertisements that request applications from “recent graduates.” According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which has increasingly taken an aggressive stance on issues like this, here would be a situation where a seemingly neutral employment policy resulted in a disproportionate negative effect on older applicants.

It’s illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of age, as well as gender, race, color, religion, national origin or disability.

Pregnancy Discrimination a Growing Problem in U.S.

March 3, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

The Chicago Public School System recently came under fire after it was alleged a number of teachers were fired on the basis of their pregnancies. A federal discrimination lawsuit has been filed.

The district staunchly denies this assertion, insisting the teachers were let go as a result of performance ratings, and that lay-off determinations were consistent with the necessity of business. The district further asserts the lawsuit has no merit because there is no pattern of discrimination when all employment decisions stemmed from non-discriminatory, legitimate reasons.

However, the U.S. government asserts otherwise, noting that in the course of three years, the district took adverse employment action against eight teachers who were either pregnant or who had just returned to work after pregnancy. The disparate treatment those individuals suffered included poor performance evaluations, where previously their records had been stellar.

Franchises Face Wage-and-Hour Lawsuits

February 28, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

Wage theft is a serious problem within many varying industries.

It’s worth noting there is an overall increase in wage-and-hour lawsuits, due to a combination of factors that includes workers becoming more aware of their rights, more active state and federal regulators and advanced technology that allows employees to conduct work remotely at any time of the day or night. Some of the litigation has focused on:

Misclassification of workers as salaried employees or independent contractors (ineligible for overtime pay or certain benefits)

Nikmanesh v. Wal-Mart – Pharmacists File California Labor Lawsuit

February 26, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

A California labor lawsuit has been filed by a former Wal-Mart pharmacist on behalf of all pharmacists working for the retailer, alleging missed breaks and unpaid overtime.

Plaintiff in Nikmanesh v. Wal-Mart worked for the company for more than a decade, from 2003 through 2014. He alleges that in addition to a failure to ensure pharmacists received legally-mandated rest breaks, the company refused to compensate him and others for class time spent studying and completing immunization training programs. The training programs, he asserted, was related directly to his responsibilities as a pharmacist.

The complaint asserts the company implemented and utilized a company-wide policy of denying overtime compensation or any compensation whatsoever for certain work-related tasks. The lawsuit seeks class action status for all pharmacists who worked for the company within the last four years.

Truckers Win Racial Discrimination Lawsuit – One of Many in the Industry

February 25, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

Truckers have a tough job, working long hours, traveling long distances and navigating tough terrain with heavy machinery. The job can be made even more difficult when bosses engage in racial discrimination.

Yet time and again, we hear about trucking companies discriminating against their workers on the basis of race. They may assume that because truck drivers are isolated from others in the company, workers may not learn how pervasive the problem is. Employers may also assume that because drivers may have limited job mobility, they may be less likely to speak out.

What we are seeing in recent years, however, are a number of truck drivers who are succeeding in racial discrimination lawsuits. The most recent case involved seven truckers working for the same Denver, Colorado-based firm.

Pao California Gender Discrimination Lawsuit Against Venture Capital Firm Goes to Trial

February 23, 2015 | by Nassiri Law

A high-profile gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit is underway in Silicon Valley, with one of the area’s oldest venture capital firms in the center of the storm.

In her complaint, Ellen Pao claims she was subjected to five years of retaliation after she refused sexual advances from several of the senior partners at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers. As a former partner of the firm, she stated she and other female workers were discriminated against when it came to matters of pay and promotions. She also said she was pressured into having an affair with a senior executive, and after she ended it, the discrimination began – and continued for the better part of five years. She is seeking $16 million in compensation for back pay, future wage losses and other damages as a result of the alleged discriminatory conduct.

The case is being closely watched as it has underscored longstanding issues of sexual inequality in the field of technology. As a result, many technological firms have started releasing diversity data regarding their workforces, and have vowed to make improvements with regard to racial and gender balances.