California Employment Lawyers Blog

As Southern California Employment Attorneys, we have been following the recent settlement of an employment lawsuit--where U.S. Security Associates will pay $79,880 for subjecting a female security guard to pregnancy discrimination, wrongful termination, and retaliation.

According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Margaret Gibson was an employee at the Marietta, Georgia facility, working for U.S. Security as a security guard. After informing her manager that she was pregnant, she was allegedly mistreated, subjected to discipline that was unwarranted, and made to endure sexist comments about the manager's bias against pregnancy in the workplace, as well as sexist comments about how Gibson would look in the security guard uniform. After completing and turning in her application for maternity leave, Gibson's employment was terminated on the same day. The EEOC claimed that her husband, who was also employed with U.S. Security, was also terminated, after he failed to stop his wife from filing a pregnancy discrimination complaint.

Under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) that amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, pregnant women or women who are affected by conditions that are related to pregnancy must be treated like other employees or applicants with the same abilities in the workplace. Discrimination of the basis of pregnancy, medical conditions related to pregnancy, or childbirth constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII.

Continue reading "Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Settled--U.S. Security Associates to Pay $80,000" »

In a recent blog, our California Employment Attorneys discussed the seriousness of teenage sexual harassment in the workplace, and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) fight to keep young workers protected and educated as to their employment rights.

In 2007, according to an analysis of seven years of EEOC data, restaurants accounted for the majority of employers sued by the EEOC over alleged harassment of teenagers in the workplace. In the study, dating back to 1999, out of 127 EEOC complaints involving teenagers, 72 were against restaurant companies, and all but 11 of these were sexual harassment cases. Restaurants paid out more than $7.3 million to settle teenage harassment lawsuits.

According to the EEOC, an alarmingly high number of cases are now being reported by high school students who have experienced sexual harassment from their managers or supervisors. The EEOC claims that employers who choose to hire teenagers have a responsibility to protect them under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under law, it is illegal to harass or discriminate against teenage employees based on gender, race, color, sex (including pregnancy), national origin or age, in hiring, firing, training, wages, benefits and promotions.

The EEOC states that when workers complain to supervisors about harassment in the workplace, it is the responsibility of the employer to take action and end the unlawful discrimination. The commission also stated that cases involving the sexual harassment of teenage victims need to be taken seriously.

Continue reading "EEOC's 'Youth at Work' Protects Teenage Workers from Harassment" »

In a recent blog, our Southern California Labor and Employment Attorneys discussed the current San Bernardino County claim involving District Attorney Michael Ramos, and a former employee--who accused Ramos of sexual harassment and retaliation.

According to a San Bernardo County memo recently released, the District Attorney's Office did not retaliate against Cheryl Ristow, the former employee who claims to have had an affair with Ramos.

Cheryl Ristow worked as an investigative technician for the District Attorney's office for seven years and filed a claim last year against Ramos for sexual harassment. According to Ristow, after their affair of over seventeen months ended and the details of their affair were about to become public, she was subjected to a hostile work environment and retaliation by three top officials--by being accused of trivial violations by her supervisors that were unwarranted. Ristow took a disability leave of absence for stress in July of 2009, and recently filed a $1.5 million claim against the county.

After the county authorized a $140,000 investigation into the alleged misconduct, led by a Santa Monica law firm, the San Bernardino County's Department of Human Resources announced that Ramos did not harass or retaliate against the coworker after their consensual affair ended in February of 2005.

Continue reading "District Attorney Cleared of California Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Allegation" »

In recent California Employment Law news, an employee of San Bernardino County District Attorney's office has filed a claim against the county for $1.5 million, after filing a complaint against District Attorney Michael A. Ramos in August of last year, for sexual harassment and retaliation.

Cheryl Ristow worked for the District Attorney's office for seven years as an investigative technician, and claimed to have been involved in an affair with Ramos for over three years, that ended in 2005. Ristow later corrected this statement to the San Bernardino Sun Times, and stated that the relationship lasted for one and one half years--from September of 2003 until February of 2005.

Ristow alleges that after the relationship ended and news of the affair surfaced in a local newspaper, Ristow was rejected by Ramos, and made to endure workplace hostility.

Supervising Deputy District Attorney Michael Fermin and Michael Smith, Chief District Attorney Investigator, are also named in the suit. The suite alleges that Fermin acted as the main conduit between Ristow and Ramos--when the story of the alleged affair was about to become public.

Continue reading "California Worker Files $1.5 M Claim against District Attorney and County for Sexual Harassment" »

As Anaheim-based Labor and Employment Lawyers, we have been following the recent California discrimination case brought against Giumarra Vineyards Corporation, where the company is being accused of sexually harassing a young female farm worker, creating a hostile work environment, and retaliation.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, and claimed that the teenage worker was forced to endure sexual comments and verbal harassment, as well as inappropriate sexual touching by a non-management Giumarra worker on a daily basis. After witnessing the sexual harassment, a group other farm workers stood by the victim and filed a complaint with Giumarra Vineyards, reportedly one of the largest table grape growers in the country.

According to the lawsuit, one day after reporting the harassment, the teenager and the class of farm workers were all fired in retaliation. All of the identified victims in the case are indigenous Indians from Mexico--a reported minority in the Mexican community of farm workers.

According to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is against the law to harass employees based on gender, and illegal to retaliate against a worker who files a complaint about discrimination in the workplace. The EEOC states that when workers complain to supervisors about harassment in the workplace, it is the responsibility of the employer to take action and end the unlawful discrimination. The commission also stated that cases involving the sexual harassment of teenage victims are taken seriously, as are aggressive acts of retaliation against workers who stand up for their rights, and the rights of their colleagues in the workplace.

Continue reading "California Vineyard Accused of Teenage Sexual Harassment " »

In recent employment and labor law news, that our Anaheim, California attorneys have been following, a prominent Tufts University chemistry professor and co-investigator for the high profile NASA 2008 Phoenix Mars Lander mission, is being sued by a former research assistant for the NASA science team--for alleged sexual harassment and gender discrimination.

Suzanne Young, a former Tufts University researcher and lecturer took part in the Tufts University group that helped build and create experiments for the NASA mission--to study the chemical composition soil on Mars and investigate whether life is possible on the planet. Kounaves and his team created and designed a wet chemistry lab on the Phoenix Mars Langer to analyze the soil for life. NASA experiments were led by the University of Arizona, and the headquarters were located in Tuscon.

Young's sexual harassment lawsuit claims that Samuel Kounaves, an associate professor at Tufts and one of the co-investigators of the mission from 2003 until 2009, subjected her to repeated incidents of improper behavior that was disturbing and sexually charged, where Kounaves made consistent requests for sexual favors. Kounaves allegedly told her that her job security and employment advancement in the future would depend upon her sexual consent.

Kounaves also reportedly insisted that Young stay with him on business trips in 2007, and threatened not to pay her lodging reimbursement when she refused the accommodations--even though he would allegedly pay for male colleagues to have separate lodging. Kounaves reportedly only agreed to pay for her accommodations after she reported this to other NASA colleagues.

Continue reading "NASA Scientist Hit with Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination Lawsuit" »

In a previous blog, our California Employment Lawyers reported on the high profile two-year Dan Rather employment lawsuit--in which Dan Rather, former CBS Evening News anchor, accused CBS network of breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and ruining his reputation, after spending 44 years as an employee of CBS. The case was dismissed in September of last year, in the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, and Rather made plans to appeal.

Yesterday, New York's highest court denied Rather's request for an appeal, declining to hear the former CBS Anchor's motion to reinstate the $70 million lawsuit--leaving the dismissal of the case by the Manhattan appeals court from September intact, and marking a seeming end to the embittered and costly legal battle.

In the lawsuit, Rather claimed that CBS had breached his contract by not giving him enough broadcast time, after he was removed from news anchor in March 2005. Rather alleged that CBS set him up be the scapegoat for the controversial 60 Minutes broadcast from 2004, in which President George W. Bush's Vietnam War service the Texas Air National Guard questioned.

After the broadcast, Rather and CBS received criticism for the story, especially from conservative partisans who claimed that Rather was trying influence the presidential race from 2004. The authenticity of the documents was questioned, CBS conducted an internal investigation, and determined that the story was inaccurate. Rather was forced to apologize for the journalistic errors. The episode was called "Rathergate," by the media, and according to Rather the experience cost him substantial financial loss, as well as damage to his reputation. Bush won his second term as President of the United States two months later.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Rather's decision to sue CBS in 2007 caused strain in his professional relationships, and he received journalistic criticism for trying to pass blame for the inaccuracy of the 60 Minutes broadcast that had not been fully researched. Rather clams to have made a career out of fighting for journalistic freedom, and this case has represented a mission to take on the political and business interests that he believes are influencing news organizations.

Continue reading " Rather's Request for an Appeal Rejected by NY York State Supreme Court" »

In yesterday's post, our California Employment and Labor Attorneys discussed a new report released last week by the UCLA Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, that surveyed 1,815 workers in Los Angeles County in 2008, focusing on low-wage workers who were most likely to experience some form of wage and hour violation in the workplace--workers in professions like the garment industry, service industry, construction, and domestic help. Compared to Chicago or New York, low-wage workers in Los Angeles were most found most likely to be subjected to workplace violations based on pay.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the study was geared to focus on the largely immigrant workforce that is often missed in regular employment surveys--17% of all workers in Los Angeles County, or 750,000 people. In the report, 56.4% were immigrants with no documentation, a vulnerability that is often exploited by employers. Nearly 75% of the workers in the study were Hispanic, and almost 60% of the workers claimed to not have a high school education.

According to the five-year study, workplace violations are the result of employer decisions--on whether or not to pay minimum wage and overtime, to give workers lawful meal breaks, overtime pay, pay documentation, safe working conditions, or how to respond to complaints in the workplace.

The report found that small and large employers throughout Los Angeles County are violating labor laws on a regular basis, and that certain sectors of the Los Angeles economy have allegedly built business strategies that incorporate labor law violation--especially with Los Angeles workers who have no union representation, and who are employed in service or apparel industries, and construction.

Continue reading "Labor Violation in Los Angeles and the Role of Public Policy Development" »

In a recent blog, our Southern California Labor and Employment Lawyers discussed a study released by UCLA last year that surveyed over 4,000 low-wages workers in 2008 throughout Los Angeles, Chicago and New York, examining financial discrimination and systematic violations of employment and labor laws in low-wage industries.

A new report was released last week that is part of the same study, and focuses specifically on Los Angeles County, the home of the largest population of undocumented workers in this country. The authors describe this study as a significant effort to focus on the largely immigrant workforce that is often missed in regular surveys.

The study, entitled "Wage Theft and Workplace Violations in Los Angeles," released by the UCLA Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, surveyed 1,815 workers in Los Angeles County in 2008, all in low-wage professions, where the average worker's salary was $8 per hour. The study focused on domestic workers, garment workers, service industry employees, and construction workers, and found that compared to Chicago or New York, low-wage workers in Los Angeles County were the most likely to experience some form of pay-related violation in the workplace.

The survey also found that low wage workers are often robbed of their legal rights, by being forced to work during their breaks and off the clock, subjected to a lack of payroll documentation, stealing of tips, late pay, retaliation by employers, and being forced to work with employment-sustained injuries. According to the report, in almost every case, the rates of violation are higher in Los Angeles than the rates shown in Chicago or New York.

Continue reading "New Study Reveals More Abuse of Low-wage Workers in Los Angeles" »

Our Southern California Labor and Employment Lawyers have been following the recent lawsuit filed against K-Designers of Rancho Cordova, California, in which a former female sales manager is accusing the company of sexual discrimination and retaliation.

According to the lawsuit, Corri Buckley, a former sales manager within the exterior home remodeling company, worked in an employment environment that was dominated by men, and from mid 2006 to mid 2007, she was reportedly subjected to sexual discrimination and subsequent retaliation for filing a complaint with her branch manager.

Buckley accused the K-Designers' management of discriminating against her by trying to isolate her from other workers, denying her training along with other staff, placing her on disability leave when she was perfectly able to do work, and in the end terminating her employment.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in the workplace based on sex, color, race, religion, and national origin. Any employee who complains against such unlawful offenses is also protected from retaliation within the company.

Continue reading "Female Manager Sues K-Designers for Sexual Harassment and Retaliation" »

In recent Los Angeles, California employment news, the infamous Playboy mogul Hugh Hefner has been sued by a former party planner for the Playboy Mansion--allegedly for unlawful termination while she was on medical leave.

Jenny Lewis worked as a Playboy's Guest Relations Coordinator for the Hefner and the Playboy Mansion for eleven years, and reportedly took a medical leave to recovery from surgery. According to the suit, after Lewis had permission from the company to take the leave of absence, she was unlawfully terminated from her employment on November 4, 2009 during her recovery period.

The lawsuit accuses the Playboy executives of twelve counts of liability that relate to the California and Fair Housing Act--the statute that fights unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment in California employment and housing.

Lewis claims that after receiving outstanding performance reviews for ten years, Lewis was retaliated against after she questioned certain practices that she felt were in violation of the California Employment and Fair Housing Act. She also accused Playboy of gender discrimination, citing that Lewis along with five other women were demoted and sent to the back-offices of the Playboy Mansion, while men in similar positions were not demoted in such a way. Lewis also claims she was subjected to a hostile work environment, and according to the entertainment website TMZ, she was unlawfully terminated after she turned 47, and her position was replaced by a 33-year old woman.

Continue reading "Former Playboy Mansion Party Planner Sues Hugh Hefner for Unlawful Termination" »

In a report released today by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), that our California Labor and Employment Lawyers have been following, during the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009, 93,277 charges of workplace discrimination throughout the nation were registered with the EEOC, with monetary relief obtained for the victims that totaled over $376 million. This is the second highest level of discrimination charges ever filed with the commission.

According to the EEOC data, equal employment opportunity still seems unreachable for many workers, and the EEOC stresses that employers must work harder to create employment environments that are free from discrimination--to also avoid being sued by the Commission.

The data from FY 2009 show that job discrimination charges in the private sector, including complaints against local and state governments, allege that workplace bias based on religion, national origin, and disability peaked at all time record highs. Discrimination based on age reached the second-highest level of complaints ever, and the most commonly filed charges alleged race discrimination, retaliation, and discrimination based on gender. The Commission also resolved more charges than ever under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as allegations of unlawful harassment.

The total discrimination filings are reported to be possibly due to many factors--increased diversity and shift in demographics in the workforce, greater public access to the Commission, economic conditions, and worker awareness of employment rights. The EEOC has also cut down the steps needed for an individual employee to file a charge.

Continue reading "Discrimination in the Workplace Sets New Record High in 2009" »

Our Anaheim, California Employment Lawyers have been following the recent news of the $19 million class action sexual discrimination lawsuit settlement between OSI Restaurant Partners, LLC and thousands of female employees at hundreds of the private company's Outback Steakhouse nationwide restaurants.

The case claimed that OSI engaged in employment discrimination against female workers and denied the women equal opportunities for advancement.

According to the gender discrimination lawsuit, filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 2006, thousands of women endured a 'glass ceiling' practice at Outback, and were consistently denied promotions to profit sharing management positions in the restaurants that were at a higher level. The female employees were also reportedly denied favored job assignments, which included kitchen management--the job that was a requirement for any employee to be eligible for higher management positions.

In addition to the $19 million in monetary relief, Outback will furnish remedial relief in the settlement, including creating an online application system for employees who have interest in managerial and supervisory positions, employing an outside consultant to determine company compliance with the decree for two years, as well as reporting to the EEOC every six months to ensure that women are being provided equal opportunities for female promotion.

Continue reading "Outback Steakhouse Sexual Discrimination Settlement--$19 Million for Female Employees" »

In recent Los Angeles, California employment law news, our attorneys at Howard Nassiri, PC have been following the Los Angeles Times report that nannies who get flu shots may have an advantage in the job market.

According to the article, for many parents, reaching an agreement about the topic of administering flu vaccines for nannies and child-care givers has proved to be difficult, and often impossible.

For many parents with new babies who are too young to be vaccinated, there is great interest in hiring childcare providers who have either received the vaccine, or who are willing receive it--as babies younger than 6 months are considered to be most at risk for serious complications with the swine flu. But many care-givers are fearful and not willing to take the vaccine--with worries that the vaccine might make them sick, cause irreversible side effects, or make them incapable of working.

January is reported to be a peak month for hiring nannies, as new mothers are going back to work after the holidays. Some nannies are using the vaccination to get an advantage in the job market, but many are still refusing the H1N1 vaccination, because of worries of side effects, cost, or because they are unable to get access to the vaccine. Even with parents willing to pay for the vaccination, many nannies are still not interested in taking the H1N1 flu precaution. California legal experts have been reportedly receiving calls from worried parents and agencies who are dealing with hesitant and reluctant nannies.

Continue reading "H1N1 Flu Vaccine Reported to Give Nannies an Employment Advantage" »