Orange County Employment Lawyers Blog

LA Workers’ Congress Renews Fight for Workers’ Rights

March 19, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

One of the best ways workers can shield themselves from discriminatory practices at work is through the use of organized resistance to unscrupulous practices by employers. When a worker’s rights have been violated, there may be the possibility of taking legal action but many labor unions strive to prevent such violations before they occur.

According to a recent news article from People’s World, the Los Angeles chapter of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), has pledged to renew their efforts to form an “inseparable resistance to illegal and otherwise unfair employment practices” committed by various employers in Los Angeles and across California. Continue Reading ›

Study Shows Shifting Schedules Major Problem for LA Retail Workers

March 17, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

While many people have the same schedule for work in any given week, this is a luxury most in the Los Angeles retail industry do not enjoy. According to a recent news article from CBS Los Angeles, a new study from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), finds most retail workers face the difficulties of a constantly shifting schedule and it creates a serious hardship in many aspects of their lives, especially when it comes to arranging for child care.

Working in a retail environment often means workers must wait for the next week’s schedule to come out to know what days and hours they will be required to work. There is often a mechanism for requesting certain times off, but employer’s do not always approve such requests, and even if they do, it is not uncommon for these approved-requests to be completely ignored when putting out a schedule. This is not only true for those in the retail industry, but also for those in the service industry, such as working at a restaurant. Continue Reading ›

Employees Win in California Supreme Court Wage and Hour Ruling

March 14, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

Employees got a big win in California Supreme Court recently in a case that ruled on interpretation of guidelines regarding overtime wages. The case in particular examined what formula should be used to calculate overtime wages and whether companies should follow Division of Labor Standards Enforcement rules or federal standards. Plaintiff said company was undercutting his pay by using the federal formula rather than following California rules, which give more favor to employees. And the high court, thankfully, agreed.

Overtime rate of pay is usually calculated using a formula of 1.5 times the regular pay rate. If an employee makes an hourly wage and nothing else, the calculation is easy. For example. someone who earns $12 per hour would receive $18 per hour once they rolled into overtime hours. But there are different interpretations as to what the calculation would be when an employee has additional income that needs to be included, such as a flat sum bonus, according to a Bloomerg report. That’s the crux of the case at hand.

Defendant in this case was a manufacturing company that paid workers an extra $15 bonus for each Saturday or Sunday they worked. The bonus was the same regardless of how many hours were worked on that shift. Defendant was using the federal formula for calculating the overtime rate of pay, which adds up all income earned and divides by all hours worked, including the overtime hours. A lower appeals court sided with the company, sending the case up to the state Supreme Court.

New Wrongful Termination Allegations Against Orange County Official

March 12, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

It’s always unfortunate when the trust between an employer and employee is broken. We see it every day in our line of work, defending employees whose rights have been violated on the job. It’s doubly hard when an employer chooses to lash out against those who take legal action to protect their rights. The good news is this kind of retaliation is not legal and you are not without options to fight back.

We saw this recently, in Orange County, where the executive assistant of county supervisor Todd Spitzer is suing him for a second time, alleging defamation that followed a wrongful termination in 2016. According to The Orange County Register, the wrongful termination lawsuit was settled last year. Now, plaintiff says her former boss told reporters and other third parties her firing was the result of incompetence, rather than a wage and hour dispute. He further allegedly told these others she refused to take necessary computer classes and implied she could not complete basic computer tasks.

Plaintiff said not only were those statements false, but they are now hurting her ability to find new employment. This spurred the second filing in Superior Court of California, County of Orange. At the time these alleged statements were made, plaintiff says she had already completed several computer classes on her own accord. The lawsuit alleges she even requested an additional computer class, a request which Spitzer rejected shortly before letting her go. It’s worth noting plaintiff worked for the county supervisor for three years by the time of her firing. It would seem one would not survive long in that role absent basic computer knowledge.

Former Agent Feeling Heat in Hollywood Sexual Harassment Shakedown

March 11, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

While the #metoo movement is shining a spotlight on sexual harassment and the dark corners of Hollywood, an increasing number of civil sexual assault cases are being filed, some against former supervisors, co-workers and the institutions that protected them when they owed a duty of care to the victim.

Here in California, one former agent is battling a civil lawsuit filed by a former client alleging sexual battery and sexual harassment. The agent has asked the Los Angeles Superior Court to stay the civil case until the statute of limitations expires on the criminal case, arguing that to proceed and participate in the civil case could result in self-incrimination leading to serious felony charges, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Defendant (through his attorney) vehemently denied the allegations. Of the request to stay, his attorney explained the civil complaint read like criminal charges and discovery requests made additional claims of criminal behavior, causing concern that testimony during the lawsuit could bring about formal charges.

This underscores the fact that many civil lawsuits may coincide with criminal charges, and while these are two totally separate processes operating independently of another (and sometimes with very different outcomes), there are times when one may have an impact on the other. A good employment law attorney will do everything possible to keep your case moving when that is in your best interests.

Justice Department Sues Nonprofit for Firing Army Reservist

March 10, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

While the Army is preparing dedicated men and women to be brave and strong and defend our country, it does not prepare them for one terrible challenge no one wants to face: losing their job. Even worse is when military status discrimination is suspected to be the cause of the dismissal.

This brings us to Austin, Texas, home of a nonprofit technology company currently being sued on allegations it wrongfully fired an Army Reservist in 2016 shortly after he returned from fulfilling military obligations as a result of him completing those duties. The U.S. Justice Department, who filed the lawsuit jointly with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Texas, says this is in direct violation of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. This act, U.S. Code, Chapter 43, Part III, Title 38, states that “a person who … has an obligation to perform service in a uniformed service shall not be denied initial employment, reemployment, retention in employment, promotion, or any benefit of employment by an employer on the basis of that membership, application for membership, performance of service, application for service, or obligation.”

The employee was a lieutenant colonel who had served in the Armed Forces for 22 years. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas, Austin Division, is seeking an amount equal to lost wages and benefits for plaintiff.

Honoring Officers Who Stand Up Against Sexual Harassment and Discrimination

March 7, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

In a climate where claims of sexual harassment are continually coming to the surface and stories of police wrongdoing are constantly in the news, it is refreshing to see people honored who have fought to protect their rights and maintain their values.

The Asbury Park-Neptune Chapter of NAACP in New Jersey recently honored two female members of the local police officers who twice filed lawsuits as a result of sexual harassment and race discrimination they allege was taking place in their police department, according to App. Long before the New York Times‘ Harvey Weinsten expose or the popularity of #MeToo on social media, these two women were standing up when it would have been so much easier to buckle under the pressure.

Their story begins in 2013 when the two reported repeated sexual harassment and discrimination. One of the plaintiffs claim a lewd magnet was stuck to her car and in a separate instance a crass message was place on her car, a vehicle she used to visit the local high school. She also alleges that she was repeatedly not given the resources she needed to properly serve the high school, such as active shooter training and access to a tactical vehicle, both of which were given to a male resource officer for the school. Plaintiffs allege in the lawsuit instances of inappropriate conversations about pornography and personal sex lives, and crude gestures.

Board Vacates Franchise Labor Law Decision

March 4, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

In a surprise move, the National Labor Relations Board reversed its own recent stance on the “joint employer rule” that determines the standard for unions and workers to hold companies accountable for the actions of contractors and franchisees. The Obama-era joint employer rule made it easier for workers and unions. A December 2017 decision by the labor board under Trump reversed that. But late last month, the board has ruled that a conflict of interest nullifies the December ruling – meaning workers will once again have an easier time holding employers accountable (for now).

The board determined one of the members had a conflict of interest. The December ruling had indicated franchisors could only be considered a “joint employer” to a franchisee when there is evidence the franchisor exercised direct control over workers. It was an about-face from the 2015 ruling that empowered workers to pursue claim against or seek collective bargaining with major corporations that may not actually sign their paychecks. It’s not necessary to show direct control under this standard.

Major franchise owners, like McDonald’s, have a lot at stake in this decision. These companies prefer to insulate themselves from responsibility once a franchisee takes over by limiting their own liability for a franchisee’s alleged labor law violations.

Sexual Orientation Protected by Title VII, Court Says

March 1, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

The intent of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to protect workers from employer discrimination, is alive and well as courts continue to use this more than 50-year-old statute to defend citizens who are unjustly targeted by their employer for their sex, national origin, race, color, or religion. And thanks to a skydiving instructor and a ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, sexual orientation is becoming more recognized as a status that falls under these protections.

Sexual orientation discrimination is a form of sex discrimination, the court recently determined in its 10-3 opinion, which mirrors a previous ruling by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals last year, according to CNN. The opinion affirms the conclusion of the 7th Circuit as well as EEOC Decision No. 0120133080 that the employee’s sex is being taken into consideration in relation to the person they are attracted to. In other words, if a male employee was attracted to a man and a female employee is attracted to that same man, punishing the male employee would be discrimination based on his sex, all other considerations remaining the same. The ruling further outlines “associational discrimination,” as a form of sex discrimination because the “employer took his or her sex into account by treating him or her differently for associating with a person of the same sex.”

This flings opens the door for others in those circuits to file lawsuits for sexual orientation discrimination. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals covers Connecticut, New York and Vermont, while the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals includes areas of Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. Continue Reading ›

Bill Seeks to Protect Music Professionals and Other Contractors

February 26, 2018 | by Nassiri Law

For months, Hollywood has been shaken by accusations of widespread harassment and sexual misconduct in the film industry. Those claims inspired people all over the country to come forward with their own stories. Now all eyes are shifting to the music industry, starting with Tennessee.

There, lawmakers have introduced a bill in hopes of closing up a loophole that has left contract workers vulnerable to harassment, according to NPR. Contract workers are left without the same protections employees receive. And since many entertainers and music professionals fall under this category, it has left the music industry particularly exposed.

HB 1984 defines an independent contractor and extends employee harassment protections, making it landmark for workers’ rights if it passes. “It is a discriminatory practice for an employer to harass an employee, an applicant, or a person providing services pursuant to a contract because of the employee’s, applicant’s, or person’s sex,” according to the bill. Continue Reading ›