employment attorney

Orange County Employment Attorney Talks Claims for Employer Retaliation

February 26, 2019 | by Nassiri Law

It is no secret that businesses do not want to pay out more in liability damages than they have to. Larger firms have entire departments dedicated to reducing liability, which usually include human resources professionals and legal advisers/consultants. Orange County employment lawyers know this isn’t necessarily a bad thing – if the goal is reducing the discriminatory and unlawful actions that spark workplace litigation in the first place, such as discrimination or wrongful termination.

Unfortunately, far too many companies retaliate against employees for engaging in activities protected under federal and state law – such as filing a claim for Orange County workplace discrimination or sexual harassment or cooperating with outside investigators examining such claims.

Retaliation involves some type of unlawful adverse employment action carried out by an employer with the intent of punishing a lawful action by an employee (often one that hurts the company’s bottom line or reputation). The California Department of Industrial Relations has a specific unit dedicated to Retaliation Complaint Investigation. Continue Reading ›

What Kind of Damages Will I Receive in a California Employment Lawsuit?

February 23, 2019 | by Nassiri Law

Working with an experienced Los Angeles employment lawyer, it is absolutely possible to prevail in a California employment lawsuit. The amount of damages (monetary compensation) you receive as a result of winning your case will depend on a myriad of factors. Because your attorney is probably working your case on a contingency fee basis (paid a portion of awarded damages if outcome if successful, paid nothing if not), he or she is likely to consider and discuss all of this with you before you even begin the process, as potential valuation of a case can determine whether it’s worth pursuing in the first place.

Your Los Angeles employment lawyer can explain, there are two basic types of damages that can be awarded in California employment lawsuits involving discrimination or unfair wages. These are compensatory and punitive.

Compensatory damages will cover workplace discrimination victims for out-of-pocket expenses and actual losses. These involve both tangible losses like the amount of wages lost, medical expenses required or job search costs incurred. It may also involve intangible losses like mental anguish or loss of life enjoyment. Punitive damages, on the other hand, are intended to penalize the employer whose actions are deemed reckless and malicious.

Some examples of compensatory damages awarded in California employment lawsuits (including discrimination and wage-and-hour) include:

Lost wages/benefits
Costs for retraining/job search
Compensation for physical pain, emotional distress, loss of professional reputation, etc.
Attorney’s fees

What is a “Protected Class” in Los Angeles Employment Discrimination Lawsuit?

February 20, 2019 | by Nassiri Law

In order to be successful in claiming employment discrimination in California, employees must first assert they are part of a protected class that received unfair treatment. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) explains that to discriminate means to treat someone less favorably and disparately, with federal protections extending to individuals on the basis of gender, religion, color, race, national origin, disability or age (over 40). In California, unlawful practices spelled out by the Fair Employment and Housing Act 12940 outlines protections for these classes, but also for:

Genetic information
Marital status
Gender identity/gender expression
Sexual orientation
Military or veteran status

Part of the reason California’s additional protected classes matter is they go farther than federal law, giving unfairly-treated employees more options to pursue action.

As Los Angeles employment discrimination attorneys can explain, “protected classes” aren’t merely limited to minorities. But employment discrimination is often subtle – and doesn’t necessarily need to actually be a part of a protected class in order to be protected. Discrimination based on the perception of belonging or association with others in these classes can be actionable in California employment discrimination cases too.

Perceived Protected Class Employment Discrimination Continue Reading ›

How Do I File an Employment Discrimination Lawsuit in California?

February 17, 2019 | by Nassiri Law

Employment discrimination can be subtle, but it is described as unequal treatment or attitudes toward one group of employees or against another resulting in unfair, adverse impacts to a protected class of employees or prospective employees. Among the most common questions our Riverside employment discrimination attorneys receive is, “How do I file an employment discrimination lawsuit in California?” One of the first things we need to determine is whether you belong to a protected class, and if so, whether they suffered disparate and negative treatment as at least partially a result of being in that class.

The California Fair Employment Practices Act marks its 60th anniversary in 2019. The law prohibits discrimination against employees and/or applicants on the basis of one’s actual or perceived belonging or association with one of the following protected classes:

Gender (this provision also bars sexual harassment);

Race and Color
Ethnicity
Marital Status
National Origin or Ancestry
Religious Creed
Pregnancy, Childbirth or Related Conditions (including lactation)
Disability
Age (pertains to individuals over the age of 40)

Once our Riverside employment discrimination attorneys examine the facts of the case to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to file a claim, we’ll give you a detailed rundown of your legal options. Unlike other types of civil claims, the process of filing an employment discrimination claim doesn’t always go straight to court. Continue Reading ›

Corporate Study: 99 Percent of Large Businesses Settled Employment Discrimination, Harassment Lawsuits Since 2000

January 18, 2019 | by Nassiri Law

The overwhelming majority of American corporations listed in the Fortune 500 have settled at least one employment discrimination or sexual harassment lawsuit, according to a corporate industry study by a national accountability and development think-tank. Good Jobs First reports these included both individual employment lawsuits as well as class action claims, with 189 large firms like Bank of America and Coca-Cola and Walmart paying out nearly $2 billion in settlements and penalties since 2000 – roughly 35 percent of those stemming from private lawsuits (as opposed to those filed by the EEOC or Federal Contract Compliance Programs). Private lawsuits accounted for 79 percent of the $2 billion in payouts. Those are only the cases in which settlements were disclosed.

The big business that has paid the most in disclosed employment discrimination claims is Bank of America, which has paid approximately $210 million in settlements. Coca-Cola is a close second at $200 million, Novartis in third at $183 million, Morgan & Stanley fourth at $150 million and Abercrombie & Fitch rounding out the top five at $90 million. Of the parent companies that disclosed employment lawsuit penalties, 40 percent were involved in more than one case.

Walmart had the largest number of cases, but had paid out less than the others in the last 20 years – 52 million. The study authors note this likely would have been much higher if Walmart v. Dukes, a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case had a different outcome. In that case, a female Walmart worker filed for class certification alleging gender discrimination, alleging some 1.6 million former and current employees of the company qualified for the class. In a split 5-4 decision, the high court reversed the Ninth District’s ruling and determined the workers didn’t have enough in common for class certification. Continue Reading ›

Nurse Alleges California Racial Discrimination Led to Wrongful Termination From Hospital

December 16, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

A former nurse at a hospital in Pasadena has filed a California racial discrimination lawsuit against the hospital where she worked for nearly four decades, up from a housekeeper in 1984 to a registered nurse, charge nurse and later a nursing instructor. For the first 30+ years of her employment, her work experience was positive. Until late 2017, she’d never had any written reprimands. It was around this time two new supervisors were named to oversee her department. From that point on, she alleges, nurses who were black and Latina were routinely targeted for discriminatory action, with allegations coming from a small group of white nurses.

As the San Gabriel Valley Tribune reports, the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court alleges the hospital fired wrongfully terminated her for retaliation and intentionally inflicted emotional distress when she reported racial discrimination, which the hospital failed to prevent. Once the new supervisors started, she alleges Latina and black nurses were regularly singled out, harassed, given poor performance evaluations, stripped of advisory board roles and passed over for promotions. In fact, the very same month the supervisors took over, plaintiff was given a reprimand on the basis of a reportedly anonymous complaint by another worker, indicating misconduct. Problem was, on the date specified, plaintiff wasn’t even at work.

The following month, human resources personnel called her in for a meeting about further employee dissatisfaction. It was at that time she told HR that she was being discriminated against, pointing out a white nurse who had been the subject of another complaint months earlier had been given the chance to defend herself fairly, while she was denied that same opportunity when she asked. The very next month, she was again called to HR for another anonymous worker complaint. In the face of all this, plaintiff said she offered to go back to the registered nurse position she held previously and step down from her supervisory role. However, she was told the hospital didn’t allow employee demotions, her lawsuit states. Later that month, she was fired. Continue Reading ›

Criminal Background Inquiries by California Employers Narrows with Approval of SB 1412

December 2, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

Only certain background information of ex-convicts will be searchable for employment now that Governor Jerry Brown has signed SB 1412, which amends Section 432.7 of the California Labor Code. As our Riverside employment attorneys can explain, the measure stipulates that employers conducting criminal background checks on job applicants may only ask about/ weigh convictions that are relevant to the job for which a prospective employee is applying.

The new California employment law, effective January 1, 2019, applies not just to private individuals and corporations but also public agencies. Companies won’t be barred from conducting criminal background checks on job applicants, but they will be restricted in doing so. It doesn’t stop public or private employers from conducting criminal background checks as required by local, state or federal law. It does however replace the provision that allows employers to inquire about “criminal convictions” to instead say, “particular convictions.”

Doesn’t California Law Already Protect Ex-Convict Job Seekers?

As your Riverside employment attorney can explain, California law does to an extent already protect those seeking a job from being required to reveal certain information. However, SB 1412 takes it a step further in shielding more workers from discrimination based on prior criminal history. Continue Reading ›

Orange County Employment Attorneys Detail 2019 California Labor Law Round-Up

November 29, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

As 2018 nears to a close, Orange County employment attorneys are looking ahead to California labor law changes in 2019. Also, it’s not a bad idea to review for employers to review recent case law precedents and best practices and for employees to educated themselves on key facts regarding their rights and the most common types of employment lawsuits.

If you have questions regarding a specific California employment law issue, our dedicated legal team at The Nassiri Law Group is available to meet for free initial consultations. Our Labor and Employment Practice Areas range from wrongful termination to sexual harassment to Family Medical Leave Act violations and a host of discriminatory practices.

2019 Wage Law Changes in California

Let’s start with changes in wage laws. A new law passed in 2016 requires incremental minimum wage increases annually in the Golden State. Last year, per the California Department of Industrial Relations, companies with 25 or fewer employees were required to pay a minimum hourly wage of $10 while those with 26 or more employees were mandated to pay $10.50. This year, both increased by $0.50 hourly. Next year, it raises to $11 hourly for smaller employers and $12 hourly for bigger companies. By 2023, the minimum wage in California will be $15 hourly. Be aware that where federal, state or local wage laws apply, the employer is required to abide the stricter standard that is most beneficial to the employee. Minimum wage is the same for minors as adults and for full-time as well as part-time employees. If you rely on tips, companies cannot use your tip credit toward your minimum hourly wage, and unlike federal law set by the Fair Labor Standards Act, California law requires employers pay the full state minimum wage before tips. Continue Reading ›

California Trucking, Operators Sue Over State Contractor Test

November 3, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

The California trucking industry is one of many heavily scrutinized over its employee classification (or perhaps rather more aptly, employee misclassification). Many truck drivers are identified as independent contractors. Our Los Angeles employment attorneys know the obvious reason for that is trucking is a dangerous job. When truckers are considered “employees,” they must be paid overtime, given state-required breaks and workers’ compensation for injuries. Trucking companies can also be deemed vicariously liable in truck crashes involving negligent employee drivers versus, while they’d have to be found directly negligent in cases involving an independent contractor driver.

But now, two trucking contractors plus the California Trucking Association are suing the State of California over a mandated test trucking companies must take to ascertain whether a driver is an independent contractor or employee. In federal court, plaintiffs are seeking reversal of an employee-contractor test laid forth in the California Supreme Court in the case of Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles.

As Los Angeles employment attorneys can explain, the state high court in that case adopted the so-called “ABC Test,” to figure out whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee. That was in April. Continue Reading ›

9th DCA: No Rehire Clause in Employment Lawsuit Settlement Breaches Trade Law

October 8, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

What started as a California racial discrimination wrongful termination lawsuit filed by a physician has on appeal broadened employee rights of refusal in so-called “no rehire clauses” in settlement.

The case, Golden v. California Emergency Physicians Medicine Group, had previously been before the 9th DCA, but the appellate court weighed it once more to consider whether an employee could lawfully be ordered to sign an employment lawsuit settlement that would restrict future employment with the former employer/ defendant.

The answer is: It depends. In this case, some of the factors that came into play were the size and reach of defendant’s corporation, as well as the fact that the restriction included a provision that plaintiff would be at risk for termination even if his current employer or another in the future contracted with his former employer. For instance, if his former employer – a partnership of 2,000 doctors providing services to emergency rooms and 160 other facilities in 10 states – contracted to provide, say anesthesiology services with a hospital wherein plaintiff was working, his employment would be in jeopardy. That, said the court, violated his rights as outlined in BPC Section 16600.

As Los Angeles wrongful termination attorneys can explain, this is something we may see be highly relevant in future California employment law cases against large corporate defendants, particularly for professionals in specialized fields. Continue Reading ›