California Employment Lawyers Blog

In recent news that Costa Mesa-based labor and employment attorney Vincent Howard has been following, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has recently announced the settlement of a sex discrimination lawsuit-- where two women were reportedly paid less than their male colleagues who performed the same work.

According to the EEOC, Health Management Group, Inc. (HMG) will pay $260,000 to settle the gender wage discrimination lawsuit filed by the agency--after Donna Davidson and Krishna McCollins, both directors of franchise development for HMG, were allegedly compensated less than the male employees who shared equal work responsibilities. In addition to the monetary relief, HMG is required to provide training to all of the group's employees, supervisors and managers on the rights of employees, and the obligations that employers have under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Equal Pay Act.

As Vincent Howard frequently discusses in Howard Law's Carson employment attorneys blog, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it against the law for employers to engage in sex or gender discrimination in any aspect of employment, including job hiring, compensation, assignments, promotions, job termination, layoffs, job training, and other employment terms or conditions.

Under the Equal Pay Act of 1963, which is part of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) and enforced by the EEOC, sex-based wage discrimination is prohibited between women and men in the same workplace, who have employment duties that require equal skill, effort and responsibility under similar work conditions in regard to minimum wage, or overtime compensation.

Continue reading " EEOC Settles Sex-Based Wage Discrimination Lawsuit for $260K" »

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. continues to make top headlines in employment news--this time for agreeing to pay nearly $5 million to over 4,500 employees across the country, after a U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) investigation discovered that the retail giant violated the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and engaged in employee misclassification.

According to the DOL's Wage and Hour Division press release, Wal-Mart Stores, headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas, engaged in employee misclassification by classifying former and current asset protection coordinators and vision center store managers at nationwide Wal-Mart Supercenters, Neighborhood Markets, Wal-Mart Discount Stores, and Sam's Club warehouses as exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA. The WHD found that these misclassified employees were actually nonexempt, and therefore owed proper overtime compensation for any hours worked beyond forty hours in a workweek.

As Vincent Howard regularly reports in Howard Law's employment lawyers blog, the misclassification of employees continues to plague the workplace on a state and federal level--adversely affecting employees and employers alike. When an employee is misclassified as exempt from the FLSA they are often denied access to important employee protections under the act, such as minimum wage payment, overtime compensation, and unemployment insurance, among other benefits. Employee misclassification also poses a threat to law-abiding employers who play by the rules--as dishonest employers gain an unfair advantage by violating the FLSA. According to the DOL, the act of misclassifying employees also creates a great loss for the state workers' compensation funds, along with unemployment insurance.

The FLSA does provide an exemption from both the overtime payment and minimum wage requirements for workers who are employed in administrative, executive, professional and outside sales position roles, as well as certain computer employee roles. To qualify for an FLSA exemption, an individual must meet specific tests and requirements in regard to their employment duties, and be paid on a salary basis of no less than $455 a week. An employee's job title does not determine whether the employee should have exempt or nonexempt status.

Continue reading "Wal-Mart To Pay Nearly $5M in Back Wages, Damages for Employee Misclassification" »

In a recent Hollywood employment law development that Vincent Howard has been watching, actress Sharon Stone has been sued by her former live-in nanny, for violating labor laws, wrongful termination and racial harassment and slurs based on her ethnicity.

According to the Los Angeles employment lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior court this week, Stone's former nanny, Erlinda Elemen, worked for the movie star for over four years, before being wrongfully terminated in February of last year. Elemen claims that in the last six months of her employment Stone began harassing her with ethnic slurs, in reference to her Filipino heritage--including derogatory comments about her religion, food and her accent. She allegedly discouraged the nanny from talking to Stone's children so they wouldn't learn to talk with her "accent," made comments about the stupidity of Filipinos and forbid the nanny from reading her Bible in Stone's home.

As a Filipino immigrant and U.S. legal resident, Elemen reportedly began her employment with Stone in 2006 and was named "head nanny" in 2008, which required her to live with Stone full-time and take care of her three children even over holidays and during their travels.

Elemen claims in the lawsuit that although she was initially paid with proper overtime compensation when working during the holidays or on trips--once Stone learned from her accountant that she was paying the nanny overtime in January 2011, she accused the nanny of stealing and demanded that she give the money back. Elemen reportedly explained to Stone that overtime compensation was required by state and federal overtime laws, and that returning the payment was illegal. In the weeks following, Stone allegedly yelled at the nanny in front of visitors and staff, until her employment was terminated in February 2011.

Continue reading " Actress Sharon Stone Sued by Former Nanny for Overtime Violations, Wrongful Termination and Racial Slurs" »

Four carwash workers have filed a Los Angeles class action wage and hour lawsuit this week, accusing their employer, a family of carwash owners, of engaging in wage and hour violations at three of their Los Angeles-based facilities.

The wage and hour lawsuit that Vincent Howard has been following, was filed by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) in Los Angeles Superior Court on behalf of the carwash workers, who claim that Kambiz, Bijan, and Edna Damavandi, the owners of Lincoln Millennium Car Wash, Bumble Bee Car Wash, and Santa Monica Car Wash violated California wage and hour laws.

The workers allege that their employers forced them to arrive early to work, yet they were only allowed to clock in for work when there were enough cars to wash. The employers are also being accused of failing to pay overtime compensation, and failing to provide their legally entitled right to rest and meal breaks under California law.

According to the CLEAN Carwash Campaign, the coalition that works to support low-wage car wash workers in the Southland, car washes in Southern California have become the "new sweatshops"--where many businesses employ around 100 manual laborers, frequently Latinos, and violate their wage and hour rights under California law.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Car Wash Workers Sue Employers for Wage and Hour Violations" »

Hollywood star John Travolta was sued this month, in a widely publicized Los Angeles employment lawsuit that was filed by two masseurs, who claimed that the film actor sexually assaulted them during private massage-therapy sessions.

Vincent Howard has been following the developments in this Los Angeles sexual harassment lawsuit that was filed earlier this month--citing California Civil Code 51.9, the code that covers sexual harassment in a professional relationship between two parties, where a business or service is offered. Both men sought $2 million in damages, along with unspecified damages for emotional distress--before withdrawing their case this week, and changing attorneys.

The sex scandal has been widely discussed in the media, and was originally filed by Pasadena attorney Okorie Okorocha on behalf of the two men, who claimed to represent many other plaintiffs with similar complaints against Travolta. According to the Los Angeles Times, after approaching Travolta's representatives last month in an effort to settle the claims privately, Okorocha filed a nine-page assault and battery complaint with lurid details of the alleged sexual advances in Los Angeles earlier this month. The lawsuit was reportedly fraught with problems--as Travolta's legal team later provided information that Travolta had been in New York on the day in question.

In the original lawsuit, John Doe #1 reportedly accused of Travolta sexual harassment during a personal massage session at the Beverly Hills Hotel on January 16th. According to CNN, John Doe #1 withdrew the lawsuit after evidence supported that Travolta was in New York and not Beverly Hills on the day of the alleged incident--which reportedly was a mistake and should have been filed as January 15th.

Continue reading "Hollywood Sex Scandal Spurs Media Frenzy, Accuses John Travolta of Sexual Harassment" »

In recent Los Angeles, California entertainment law news that Vincent Howard has been following, ABC television network has been sued in a class-action racial discrimination lawsuit, for failing to cast people of color in the popular reality dating television shows "The Bachelor" and "The Bachelorette."

The racial discrimination lawsuit was filed by Christopher Johnson and Nathaniel Claybrooks, both African-American males who claim that they were not considered as contestants when they attended a casting to get on the show, because of their race.

Claybrooks and Johnson are reportedly filing the class action lawsuit to support all individuals of color who have tried to be contestants on the television shows, but have been denied the equal opportunity to be selected for a starring role on the basis of race. The racial discrimination lawsuit stated that in the 23 seasons of the combined shows, there has never been a bachelorette or bachelor of color chosen for the starring role.

Johnson claims in the suit that after filling out an application to be on the show and attending a casting call, he was stopped by an employee for the show and questioned about why he was there--allegedly because of his race. His application materials were reportedly taken and he was told that they would be passed on. Johnson claims he was never contacted, and unfairly dismissed due to his race.

Continue reading "ABC Sued for Racial Discrimination Over "The Bachelor"" »

AT&T settled a religious discrimination lawsuit this month, after the communication company was sued by a Kansas City employee who claimed that she was harassed at her job after she converted to Islam in 2005.

Costa Mesa-based labor and employment attorney Vincent Howard has been following the discrimination lawsuit settlement announcement, that awarded Susann Bashir punitive damages in the amount of $5 million, along with lost wages in the amount of $120,000, along with other actual damages. Despite the award from the jury, Bashir will likely receive less than the reported $5 million due to Missouri laws, which a judge will later determine.

According to the religious discrimination lawsuit, Bashir worked for ten years as an AT&T fiber optics network builder, before she was fired from her job--where she reportedly made $70,000 per year.

Bashir claimed that after converting to the Islam religion in 2005, her work environment became immediately hostile, where she received harassing comments from her colleagues about her new religion, and her religious headscarf. Bashir's suit claimed that she was shocked by the discriminatory attention, as prior to converting, no one cared about what she wore or what her religion was.

After converting to Islam, Bashir claimed that she endured constant religious discrimination in her final three years of employment at the company--having to endure discriminatory questions, derogatory statements, and being called names like a terrorist or towelhead. She also claimed that the abuse came to a boiling point when her boss grabbed her headscarf in order to expose her hair.

Continue reading "Jury Awards $5 Million to Muslim Woman in AT&T Religious Discrimination Lawsuit" »

Vincent Howard has been following the announcement of new legislation passed by California's State Assembly this week, which would ban employers from demanding that employees or job seekers provide private and personal online account information and passwords, for social networking sites, such as Facebook, or Google Plus.

The State Assembly passed Assembly Bill 1844 on Thursday, making any information that workers or job applicants deem as private on social networking sites unavailable to employers or prospective employers. The bill would not, however, prevent employers from checking social media sites for any public information that is readily available--as employers frequently check social networking sites to screen job applicants.

Assemblywoman Nora Campos (D-San Jose) sponsored the bill, and stated that the issue of gathering employee data by demanding passwords for social media programs like Facebook is a not yet a big concern in the workplace, but is more of a preventative measure--as employers would have access to an individual's private photos, and personal text messages or emails. Campos stated that our laws need to reflect the cultural changes surrounding social media, so the privacy of employees is protected.

The passing of the Assembly Bill reportedly came soon after Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) and Representatives Ed Perlmutter (D-Colorado) and Martin Heinrich (D-New Mexico) proposed similar legislation on a federal level, in response to the issue of employers demanding online access to such personal and private accounts as a condition of employment. The bills would, however, allow state and federal agencies the right to ask for personal and private passwords if the individual was involved with information that was classified.

Continue reading " CA Assembly Passes Bill to Keep Facebook Employee Passwords Private in the Workplace" »

As Vincent Howard recently discussed in a Carson, California labor and employment lawyers blog, under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) it is against the law to discriminate against qualified disabled employees or job applicants in the workplace. Employers are expected under the federal law to provide reasonable accommodations to disabled individuals, unless the employee's disability creates a significant expense, or hardship on the business operations of the employers.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the agency in charge of enforcing federal employment discrimination laws, recently filed a suit against a Wendy's fast food franchisee, claiming that the restaurant violated federal employment laws by denying employment to a job applicant due to his disability.

According to the lawsuit that Vincent Howard has been following, Michael Harrison, Jr. applied for a cooking position in a Wendy's franchise in Killeen, Texas. Despite being qualified for the job, with over two years of experience working for a different fast food restaurant franchise, Harrison was allegedly refused employment by the general manager, based on his disability--a hearing-impairment.

Harrison claimed that after applying for the cooking position, and having a successful interview with the shift manager at Wendy's, an interview was set up with the general manager, in order to complete the job interview process. Harrison reportedly used a telephonic system to facilitate the interview with the general manager, which is utilized by people with hearing impairments. During the phone interview, Harrison claims that the general manager informed him that there wasn't a place at the Wendy's franchise for a person that they could not communicate with.

Continue reading "EEOC Sues Wendy's Franchisee for Disability Discrimination" »

In recent Los Angeles employment news, the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has launched an education and enforcement initiative geared around the Los Angeles-area restaurant industry--to ensure that employers are complying with the minimum wage, overtime payment, child labor, and record-keeping provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA).

In the DOL's Los Angeles-area enforcement initiative, that Vincent Howard has been following, the WHD will reportedly conduct unannounced restaurant investigations in West Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Hollywood and the San Fernando Valley, among other areas within Los Angeles County.

According to the WHD's Los Angeles office, over the past six years, 72 percent of all restaurants that were targeted within the division's jurisdiction were found to have violated the FLSA--resulting in $2.2 million in overtime and minimum back wages that were owed to over 1,400 workers. During the same time period, the division reportedly conducted over 1,800 investigations along the West Coast and found that 71 percent were engaging in violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which resulted in over $12 million in back wages that were owed to over 9,500 workers.

The division's investigations found that many restaurants, especially low-cost ethnic restaurants, often use low profit margins as incentive in order to keep labor costs low by using employment tactics that are against the law. Many common violations include failing to pay employees for all hours worked, forcing employees to work off the clock hours, and engaging in employee misclassification by incorrectly classifying employees as exempt from overtime laws.

Continue reading "DOL Launches Los Angeles-area Restaurant Enforcement Initiative to Combat FLSA Violations" »

Our Costa Mesa-based labor and employment attorney Vincent Howard has been following a recent discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuit filed by a former teacher, who claims that she was fired from her position at a Catholic school in Indiana for trying to achieve pregnancy through in-vitro fertilization (IVF).

In the employment lawsuit, Emily Herx accuses St. Vincent de Paul School and the Diocese of Fort Wayne and South Bend of discrimination and for wrongfully terminating her employment last year due to her use of IVF--after eight years as a language arts teacher where she reportedly received excellent performance reviews.

Herx claims that she discussed her IVF treatments with her employers only after she used sick days for the treatment, and wasn't informed that IVF was an issue with her employment until a later date. When her employment was terminated, Herx claims she was told that by using IVF, which mixes an egg and sperm outside the body and transfers the embryo into the womb, she had violated the doctrines of the church--which frowns upon fertility treatments such as IVF.

According to Vincent Howard, this case sparks the ongoing debate over the separation of church and state in employment issues. In January, the Supreme Court ruled that religious employees are not permitted to file lawsuits against employers for discrimination in the workplace--after a former religion teacher in Michigan claimed she was fired for pursuing a discrimination claim over a disability. The Supreme Court stated that religious groups can dismiss their employees without interference from the government--and because the teacher was considered a "ministerial employee," she was exempt from anti-discrimination laws. However, the definition of who is or isn't a "ministerial employee" still remains unclear.

Continue reading "Teacher Sues Catholic School for Discrimination, Wrongful Termination over IVF" »