Orange County Employment Lawyers Blog

Sexual Harassment, Non-Disclosure Agreements and the #MeToo Movement

February 24, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

Former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg recently vowed to release former female employees from the non-disclosure agreements they signed in connection with their sexual harassment lawsuit settlements at his namesake company. The announcement came just days after Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren slammed Bloomberg over the agreements during the Democratic presidential debates in Las Vegas. Bloomberg said in a statement he had identified three non-disclosure agreements that were signed in resolution of complaints against statements he personally had made to his female employees. Those settlements were reached over 30 years ago.

Debate moderators had raised the question of Bloomberg’s past remarks about women, to which the billionaire responded that he would not tolerate the kind of behavior that #MeToo exposed. That’s when Warren made a point to underscore the non-disclosure agreements. Bloomberg downplayed both the number of non-disclosure agreements in which he was involved and the nature of what was alleged, characterizing the allegations as “maybe they didn’t like a joke I told.”

Bloomberg is far from the only person to come under fire for non-disclosure agreements in sexual harassment cases. Numerous women reportedly harassed and/or assaulted by Harvey Weinstein were compelled to sign non-disclosure agreements in order to settle their cases against him. The same was reportedly done in cases involving USA Gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar. Continue Reading ›

Coronavirus Discrimination? What Workers Need to Know

February 22, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

As fears of the highly-contagious and potentially fatal coronavirus continue to spread, authorities have imposed numerous drastic measures and quarantine actions, from keeping passengers for weeks on a cruise ship to canceling classes for Japanese school children for the rest of the year. Some factories in Vietnam were forced to shut down operations when mangers on holiday in China were barred from traveling.

So what happens if you miss work due to illness or quarantine? What sort of job protections exist for workers under federal law?

First, let’s start by explaining what a quarantine is. A quarantine is the confinement of individuals who either have been or could have been exposed to a certain communicable illness or disease. Someone can be quarantined even if they don’t have the illness. This is different from isolation, which occurs when individuals who are sick are kept somewhere separate from those who are sick. Both state and federal governments in the U.S. have the legal authority to quarantine, though governments typically work together to determine if it’s necessary. A quarantine can last anywhere from a few hours to several weeks. If it stretches on past a few days, it could easily affect one’s ability to make a living. Continue Reading ›

Employees Win $2M California Disability Discrimination Case Against Nursing Home Chain

February 20, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

A for-profit nursing home chain operating dozens of facilities in several states (including California) has agreed to pay $2 million and implement other corrective measures after being sued for disability discrimination.

Local media report that at the heart of the case were strict hiring and leave policies that unfairly affected those suffering a disability. Like far too many employers, the company seemed to be under the impression that applicants and workers had to be 100 percent capable of performing every job function as-is (without accommodation or restriction), and that employees need not be extended further consideration if they had run out of FMLA and sick leave time. This is not true.

As our Los Angeles disability discrimination lawyers can explain, such policies violate federal law – specifically the Americans with Disabilities Act. Continue Reading ›

Google Accused of Pregnancy Discrimination

February 19, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has launched an investigation into an alleged case of pregnancy discrimination stemming from a former employee’s memo that went viral last year.

The memo, titled, “I’m Not Returning to Google After Maternity Leave, and Here is Why, My Story of Retaliation and Discrimination at Google,” was penned by a former manager. She had worked for the company for five years, receiving stellar reviews during that time. According to her letter, treatment by her supervisors abruptly changed once she spoke up to human resources on behalf of a worker who was pregnant. Her supervisor had begun making inappropriate comments about the pregnant worker to other managers, lamenting that she was pregnant again, saying the employee was overly-emotional and difficult to work with while pregnant and expressing regret that adverse action could not be taken against her because, “you can’t touch employees after they disclose such things.” Once HR spoke to the offending supervisor, her attitude toward the claimant suddenly changed.

Claimant, who herself was pregnant, says the company retaliated against by unfairly denying her a leadership position and suddenly giving her poor performance reviews. She was transferred to another team at her request, but was told she couldn’t be a manager until after she returned from maternity leave because her being gone for three months would “rock the boat.” She later told media outlets that it wasn’t until she hired an employment attorney that the company’s HR department finally launched an investigation into her numerous complaints of discrimination and retaliation. Continue Reading ›

Survey Points to Tech Industry Workplace Discrimination Against Visa Holders

February 16, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

A survey of foreign H-1B visa holders working at tech industry employers like Apple, Lyft and Samsung say they’ve been subjected to a significant degree of workplace discrimination ever since the Trump administration made it tougher to qualify for the visas.

Visa holders say they are assigned to working conditions that dangerous, degrading and often very stressful. Nearly half of visa holders surveyed said they believe they earn less than their co-workers because of their visa status – despite the fact that the U.S. Department of Labor specifically says H-1B visa holders are not to make any less than the prevailing wage set for their role in the area where they work. Technically though, federal law does still authorize employers to misclassify H-1B visa holders as “entry level employees,” so they can earn less. A computer programmer, for example, might earn $40,000 less as an entry-level worker compared to one with experience. Still, that classification defies logic because by definition, H-1B visa holders re supposed to be highly-skilled.

The H-1B visa program allows foreign skilled workers to be brought to the U.S. to work for a limited amount of time. It’s the main way that U.S. companies hire skilled foreign workers. The program, which is already capped at 85,000 employees (less than 1 percent of the U.S. total workforce) has slowed substantially under the current administration’s policy of buying and hiring American. Priority has been given to foreign workers who hold a U.S. higher education degree. This has led to H-1B visa holder workers feeling discriminated against and treated as second-class. Yet workers feel as if they cannot speak up because the H-1B spots are so coveted and their eligibility for the program is specifically tied to employer sponsorship. Continue Reading ›

California Retaliation Lawsuit Ends in $1.1 M Verdict Favoring Employee

February 14, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

An employee of One America News Network was awarded $1.1 million in his California retaliation claim. Of that, $810,000 was in punitive damages, awarded for egregious conduct. He alleged the company had harassed and discriminated against him for his race. But while the San Diego jury did not find merit with this claim, they did hold that the producer was retaliated against for filing the complaint.

Los Angeles employment attorneys highlight this case because it underscores the fact that retaliation can stand on its own in claims of wrongful termination.

California Workplace Retaliation Laws

California has numerous workplace retaliation laws that protect workers from wrongful termination and other adverse employment actions when they engage in certain protected activity. Protected actions could include: Continue Reading ›

Race Discrimination Claim to Proceed Against CNN Despite Anti-SLAPP Concerns

February 12, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

When an award-winning news producer was fired from his job at CNN, the company claimed it was due to plagiarism. The former employee filed a lawsuit saying that reason was pretextual and he was a victim of racial discrimination and retaliation. CNN fired back that the case should be dropped because to decide otherwise would be a violation of the company’s First Amendment rights under anti-SLAPP laws. That motion was initially granted. The case was appealed up to the California Supreme Court, which ruled last year the claim might be subject to dismissal under the state’s anti-SLAPP law – specifically the company’s right to exercise editorial control over its news content. However, the case was remanded to determine if plaintiff’s underlying claim had merit enough to proceed in spite of that concern.

Now, a California appellate court has ruled in Wilson v. CNN that plaintiff’s claim has the minimal amount of merit to proceed. The case now proceeds to trial.

As our Los Angeles racial discrimination attorneys can explain, anti-SLAPP laws are intended to dismiss early on lawsuits without merit when they are filed against persons or organizations for the exercise of First Amendment rights (freedom of speech, the press, religion, peaceable assembly and to petition the government for redress of grievances). SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Anti-SLAPP laws were passed in response to a trend of lawsuits filed in retaliation to intimidate or silence critics and opponents who speak out publicly. In a lot of those cases, the underlying legal theories (tortious interference, defamation, etc.) were actually secondary to the true intent, which was to silence public opposition. Continue Reading ›

Public School Teacher Wins LGBTQ Discrimination Lawsuit

February 10, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

Even though marriage equality has become the law of the land, there are still 30 states that lack explicit employment discrimination protections for LGBTQ workers. California, thankfully, isn’t one of them. The U.S. Supreme Court is slated to render a decision in two cases wherein plaintiffs argue that Title VII protections against gender discrimination should extend to LGBTQ workers. (Justice Neil Gorsuch remarked during oral arguments that the case was “really close.”)

That decision will have a huge impact for LGBTQ public school teachers and employees.

History of LGBTQ Discrimination in Schools

Schools have a long history of discrimination against gay and lesbian teachers – from public elementary schools to prestigious universities. In the 1950s and 1960s, Florida lawmakers created a committee designed to identify and fire educators who were gay and lesbian. Some 200 LGBTQ teachers lost their jobs. Continue Reading ›

Top Employment Discrimination Claims of 2019

February 8, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has just released detailed breakdowns of the top employment discrimination claims of fiscal year 2019, which ended in September.

In total, there were nearly 72,700 claims of workplace discrimination filed with the federal agency. That’s down slightly from the nearly 76,500 claims filed with the agency in FY 2018 and more than 84,000 filed in FY 2017.

The top claims were as follows:

These were followed by claims of discrimination on the basis of national origin, color, religion, equal pay and genetic information. Continue Reading ›

Starbucks Gender Identity Discrimination Alleged at Multiple Locations

February 6, 2020 | by Nassiri Law

A recently-released Starbucks advertisement in the UK has been hailed for its progressive take on gender identity acceptance. A barista asks for the name of a customer for use on a coffee cup. He gives her the name with which he identifies – not his “deadname,” the one he was given at birth. The commercial has won an award for helping to address the transgender community’s lack of representation in advertising.

However, employees with the company say they have faced transgender discrimination at multiple locations across the country. Employees say they have been outed, misgendered, confronted by their deadnames in company software and had difficulty accessing gender-affirming medical treatment under the company’s medical insurance plans.

Some employees say they had to be transferred to new locations due to these issues and harassment – only to experience the same type of treatment at the new location. One former employee told BuzzFeed he complained about the situation to corporate, but didn’t hear any response until he took his complaint to Twitter. It was only then a spokesperson for the company apologized and promised to investigate. The worker said that while the company appears to be trying to make changes at the corporate level, addressing it at individual stores has proven challenging. Continue Reading ›