California Employment Lawyers Blog

In our previous Irvine employment lawyers blog, Howard Law attorney Vincent Howard discussed important California and federal labor and employment law cases from 2011.

In this Costa Mesa employment blog issue, Mr. Howard will continue in his labor and employment discussion, highlighting other key 2011 developments, including the EEOC's largest disability discrimination settlement with Verizon, the topic of suitable seating in the workplace, and the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) continuing crusade to curb wage and hour violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), among other high-profile cases from last year.

Verizon Pays Record $20M in EEOC's Largest Disability Discrimination Settlement
Last year, in the largest disability discrimination settlement in a single lawsuit in the EEOC's history, Verizon, the telecommunications giant, agreed to pay $20 million to resolve the EEOC's nationwide class disability discrimination lawsuit. Verizon Communications was accused in the lawsuit of violating the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) by refusing to accommodate disabled employees and make exceptions to the company's "no fault" attendance plans--which reprimands employees if they accumulate a certain amount of "chargeable absences." The EEOC accused Verizon of denying reasonable accommodations to hundreds of disabled employees by either disciplining them or firing them when they needed more time off than Verizon's leave policy allowed--especially when the "chargeable absences" were caused by disabilities.

Wage and Hour Violations Hit All Time Highs
In 2011 the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) continued on its crusade to reduce workplace labor violations and wage and hour issues. According to the DOL, overtime payment is the largest wage and hour violation issue in the country, with thousands of complaints reported every year. In 2010, nearly 6,800 wage and hour lawsuits were filed, totaling about 700 more than the previous year, and the DOL forced employers to pay an estimated $176 million in back wages to employees. In the past five years, employers have also paid nearly $925 million in back pay and overtime wages to 1.2 million workers.

Continue reading "2011 Labor and Employment Law in Review: EEOC's Verizon Settlement, Suitable Seating, Employee Misclassification" »

In a recent California disability discrimination lawsuit settlement that Howard Law's managing attorney Vincent Howard has been following, UPS Supply Chain Solutions has recently agreed to pay $95,000 after the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) found the world's biggest package delivery company responsible for illegally denying a deaf employee with reasonable accommodation in the workplace.

According to the EEOC lawsuit, deaf employee Mauricio Centeno worked at the UPS facility from 2001 until 2009 as a junior clerk in the accounting department. Centeno has reportedly been deaf since birth, and his primary language is American Sign Language (ASL). The EEOC investigation uncovered that during his employment with the company, Centeno struggled to understand written English language in the workplace, and continually asked for reasonable accommodation--in order to receive help from an interpreter for departmental staff meetings, training, and other work-related sessions.

Although aware of his hearing impairment, UPS supervisors continually denied Centeno's requests for reasonable accommodation in the workplace, and instead required that he attend the meetings, where he was reportedly counseled about his job performance without the aid of an interpreter. The EEOC found that although at times the company would provide Centeno with written notes and summaries, this did not adequately accommodate his disability--due to his lack of written English language proficiency.

The EEOC reportedly filed the disability discrimination lawsuit in 2006, claiming that UPS violated the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) by failing to reasonably accommodate Centeno.

As Vincent Howard of Howard Law has discussed in a previous Santa Ana labor and employment attorney blog, under the ADA, it is against the law to discriminate against workers who suffer from disabilities, and all employers are required by federal law to reasonably accommodate disabled job applicants and employees, unless doing so would cause a significant expense or difficulty for the employer.

Continue reading "UPS to Pay $95K in EEOC Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Settlement" »

In a recent Santa Ana labor and employment lawyers blog, Howard Law attorney Vincent Howard discussed a series of lawsuits filed against the popular Los Angeles, California-based retailer American Apparel, a manufacturing company that employs thousands of workers in the Los Angeles production facility, and in retail stores throughout the country.

In related news that our Riverside labor and employment attorneys have been following, American Apparel has agreed to settle a U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission-filed (EEOC) disability discrimination lawsuit for $60,000, after the retail company was found to have violated federal labor laws for disability discrimination.

According to the EEOC lawsuit, American Apparel violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by firing a garment worker while he was on disability leave, failing to accommodate him based on his disability.

The EEOC and American Apparel have reportedly worked over an extended period of time to settle this case, and recently arrived on a three-year consent decree--whereupon American Apparel will adopt a comprehensive ADA policy, will agree to provide the retailer's managers and supervisors with ADA training, will ensure that workers are informed as to their rights under the ADA and how to seek ADA accommodations, and will designate an ADA coordinator in order to oversee the implementation of the decree.

Continue reading "American Apparel Settles EEOC Disability Discrimination Lawsuit for $60K" »

Wal-Mart made California discrimination lawsuit headlines again last week, according to an U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) press release that our Vincent Howard, our Riverside labor and employment lawyer has been following--for allegedly failing to accommodate a disabled employee, and wrongfully terminating his employment in retaliation, because of his disability.

According to the EEOC lawsuit, David Gallo worked as an employee for Wal-Mart starting in June of 2003, and was employed for six years for the retail chain, working his way from overnight stocker to manager of the tire and lube express bay in Placerville, California.

Gallo reportedly suffers from a heart condition called atrial fibrillation, which causes a shortness of breath and making walking difficult. In March of 2008, a new store manager reportedly refused to allow Gallo to park in the handicap parking spots along with any spaces that are close to the front of the Wal-Mart store--even through the company was aware of Gallo's heart disability and his handicap parking placard. Gallo filed a California disability discrimination charge with the EEOC in September of 2008, and was fired eight months later, allegedly for a mistake made by one of Gallo's subordinates. The subordinate and the inspector who reviewed the work were not, however, fired for their mistake.

As our Carson, California employment attorney Vincent Howard has discussed in a previous Santa Ana employment lawyers blog, under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), discriminating against workers who suffer from disabilities is against the law, and employers must reasonably accommodate disabled applicants and employees. It is also against the law for employers to retaliate against employees for requesting an accommodation or for filing an EEOC discrimination charge.

Continue reading "Wal-Mart Sued by EEOC for Disability Discrimination and Retaliation of Employee with Heart Condition" »

According to the annual Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (EEOC), the commission received an unprecedented number of discrimination charges in fiscal year 2011--99,847--the highest number of charges in the EEOC's 46-year history.

The EEOC's PAR, filed earlier this month, showed that in fiscal year 2011, the EEOC staff also brought historic amounts of monetary relief through administrative enforcement--with $364.6 million in benefits for victims of discrimination in the workplace, which was also the highest amount ever obtained in the history of the commission. The fiscal year ended on September 30, 2011, with 78,136 pending charges--a total decrease of 8,202 in discrimination charges, or ten percent. This was the first reduction since 2002, as the pending inventory in the previous years had increased as staffing declined.

As our Irvine employment lawyer blog has recently discussed, the EEOC enforces the federal laws that prohibit workplace discrimination against an employee or job applicant based on race, sex, religion, color, national origin, disability, age (40 years, or older) and genetic information. It is also against the law to discriminate against an individual because the person reported discrimination, filed a discrimination charge, or participated in an employment discrimination lawsuit or investigation.

The EEOC has the authority to investigate discrimination charges against employers who are covered by federal law, and the role of the commission is to accurately and fairly assess the discrimination allegations and then make a finding. If the EEOC discovers that employment discrimination has occurred, the commission can attempt to settle the charges, and if this attempt is not successful, the EEOC has the authority to file an employment lawsuit in order to protect an individual's employment rights. According to the Chair of the EEOC, Jacqueline A. Berrien, the work of the EEOC during this past fiscal year demonstrates what can be achieved when the commission is given the necessary resources to enforce the federal laws that prohibit employment discrimination.

Continue reading "EEOC Sets Record Highs in Monetary Relief, Intake, and Charge Resolution in 2011" »

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently settled a disability discrimination lawsuit that our Carson employment attorneys have been following, after Journal Disposition agreed to pay $55,000 to settle the suit.

Journal Disposition is the former operator of a full-service print, distribution and manufacturing company, called IPC Print Services, that according to the EEOC disability discrimination lawsuit, wrongfully terminated a long-term employee due to his disability. The lawsuit states that after the employee was diagnosed with cancer, he used up the maximum amount of time available under the company's short-term disability insurance policy--which reportedly provides 26 weeks of leave within a rolling 12-month time period.

Before exhausting his work leave, the employee returned back to his job, and began working part-time, while going through rounds of chemotherapy--performing all of the necessary job functions required in his position. When his employee benefits were used up, the company terminated his employment with the understanding that such an action would make him available for rehiring once he was able to work again full-time again.

Before his firing, the employee reportedly made a request for reasonable accommodation to be able to continue working part-time until his chemotherapy treatments ended, in a projected five month period. The printing company reportedly acknowledged the request, but applied the policy regardless of the reasonable nature of the accommodation request, of his ability to perform the job, or whether the request provided any undue hardship on the company's operations.

Continue reading "EEOC Settles Disability Discrimination Lawsuit with Printing Company" »

In a recent Costa Mesa employment lawyers blog, our attorneys discussed the federal protections under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (ADA)--where employers are required to reasonably accommodate the disability of a qualified job applicant or worker, unless the individual's disability causes the employer's business operations suffer an undue hardship.

In related news, this week a former employee of the Huntington Beach City Library, who is deaf, is suing the city after she claims she was wrongfully fired from her job as a library clerk--because of her disability.

According to the lawsuit, Merrie Sager, 32, filed a disability discrimination complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (FEHC) on March 8, stating that the Huntington Beach Library management team was no longer willing to reasonably accommodate her disabilities, and that her job termination was a result of retaliation--as she had repeatedly filed complaints about the ongoing lack of reasonable accommodation.

The Orange County Register reports that when Sager was first employed in 1978 at the library, she fully disclosed her disabilities to the city library, as well as her need for written instructions on work assignments, and the assistance of a sign language interpreter to help her communicate at staff meetings.

Continue reading "City of Huntington Beach Sued by Deaf Library Clerk for Wrongful Termination and Discrimination" »

In a related Carson, California employment lawyer blog, our labor and employment attorneys reported about the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) role as the protector of the federal laws prohibiting disability discrimination in the workplace.

Under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (ADA) a disabled and qualified job applicant or employee is defined as being an individual who can perform their necessary job functions, with or without reasonable accommodation--an adjustment or modification given by the employer in order to help disabled employees have equal employment opportunities.

Employers are expected, under the ADA, to reasonably accommodate the disability of a qualified worker or job applicant, unless the disability of the employee creates an undue hardship on the employer's business operations. A reasonable accommodation includes making job facilities that are available to employees equally as accessible to disabled individuals, modifying a job to benefit the disabled employee by changing a job position or work schedule, or getting equipment or devices for disabled employees to help assist them in the employment process.

According to the EEOC, not all requests for reasonable accommodations are the same, and they depend on the individual needs of each disabled employee or applicant. Examples of reasonable accommodation include:

• Providing a deaf job applicant with a sign language interpreter during an interview for a position within the company.
• Providing a blind employee with the assistance of another person to help read information on an employee bulletin.
• Allowing a diabetic employee to restructure their workday to include regularly scheduled breaks necessary in order to monitor their blood sugar levels.
• Allowing an employee who is suffering from cancer to have treatments for radiation or chemotherapy.

Continue reading "Employee Disabilities and Reasonable Accommodations Under the ADA" »

In a previous Orange County employment lawyers blog, our attorneys discussed a recent U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) disability discrimination lawsuit settlement, where a disabled hotel front desk clerk was denied reasonable accommodation and fired, as a result of his autism.

The role of the EEOC is to enforce the federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against an employee or applicant for employment, because of the person's disability. According to Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (ADA), it is against the law to discriminate against disabled and qualified individuals in the job application process, or in hiring, advancement, employment training, job termination, compensation and other conditions and privileges of employment.

The commission also has the authority to investigate all charges of disability discrimination in the workplace, and to accurately assess the charges. If the commission finds that a disabled employee has been discriminated against, the EEOC can attempt to settle the discrimination charge, and if this attempt is not successful, the commission has the authority to file a disability discrimination lawsuit on behalf of the disabled individuals, in order to protect their employment rights.

Under the ADA, a disabled individual is a person who:

• Has a physical or mental impairment that seriously limits the person from one or more major life activities
• Has a record of this disability, and impairment
• Is regarded as an individual with such a disability, or impairment

Continue reading "EEOC Disability Discrimination Protection under the ADA" »

According to a recent news report from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that our Costa Mesa labor and employment attorneys have been following, a local California hotel operator and developer has been ordered to pay over $132,500 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit, filed by the commission on behalf of a former Autistic hotel employee.

The EEOC charged that Tarsadia Hotels, known as Comfort Suites in business, discriminated against a former front desk employee, working in a San Diego, California Comfort Suites Hotel, by denying him reasonable accommodation for his disability during his employment. Before this position, the hotel clerk had previous experience in the hospitality industry, where his work garnered him a positive recommendation for employment--but claims that he experienced disability discrimination and wrongful termination at Comfort Suites, because of his autism.

The lawsuit claims that shortly after the employee began his work at Comfort Suites, he looked into free job coach services from the state--offering autism-specific training techniques to help the clerk learn to master his work responsibilities. Tarsadia reportedly refused to allow the clerk the assistance of a job coach, and then terminated the clerk's employment.

As our Anaheim employment lawyers blog has reported in a recent post, under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) it is against the law to discriminate against individuals who are qualified, yet suffer from disabilities in job application, hiring, job advancement, compensation, training, firing, and other employment terms and conditions.

Continue reading "California's Comfort Suites Settles Disability Discrimination Lawsuit for $132,500" »

According to recent labor and employment law news that our Anaheim employment attorneys have been following, Proskauer Rose LLP, a law firm known for defending corporate clients from employment lawsuits, is being sued by its former chief financial officer for discrimination and wrongful termination.

Proskauer Rose LLP, one of the top ranking labor and employment law firms in the country, with twelve offices worldwide, was sued this week by Elly Rosenthal, 57, the former CFO of the company--who claims she was discriminated against and wrongfully terminated in March of 2011, and is seeking $10 million in monetary damages.

The Wall Street Journal reports that lawsuits like these are rare, as law firms are more likely to keep senior level employee disputes under wraps. When most firms experience discrimination lawsuits, they are often by female and minority junior attorneys who sue as after being passed over for partner.

In her sex, age and disability discrimination lawsuit, Rosenthal claims that she was demoted after returning to work following a 2008 medical leave, to recover from breast cancer surgery--whereupon her employment was later terminated. The lawsuit claims that after working for the firm for sixteen years with great success and positive reviews, she was unlawfully discriminated against by male superiors and then wrongfully terminated as a result of her gender, her age and her medical condition.

Continue reading "Female CFO Sues Proskauer Law Firm for Gender and Disability Discrimination" »

As our attorneys reported in a recent Costa Mesa, California employment lawyers blog post, California's last auto plant, New United Motors & Manufacturing (NUMMI) and its parent company, Toyota Motor Corp. were sued last year in a class action lawsuit, for allegedly denying comprehensive severance agreements to disabled workers who had sustained employment-sustained injuries, keeping them from working at the plant prior to the closure.

According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), who filed the discrimination lawsuit on behalf of the workers, NUMMI decided to contribute to a $6 million settlement fund last month, to resolve the complaints against the company for federal employment law violations.

The class action lawsuit accused NUMMI of denying disabled employees who were on medical leave severance benefits and transitional services that other employees received when the plant was closed in April of 2010. After the plant closed, the employees reportedly received a severance package that was based on whether they worked during the final six months of the plant's operation, as well as their years of service with the company.

The EEOC reportedly received a number of complaints from former employees who were on medical leave at the time of the plant's closing, alleging that they were not offered any severance benefits. The EEOC was also informed by the employees that while they were physically capable of returning to work during the severance period, they were denied reinstatement with the company. The result led the disabled workers on medical leave to be ineligible for the amount of severance compensation that factored into their years of service--many of which had worked for NUMMI for 25-30 years, and suffered losses of around $38,000 each.

Continue reading "NUMMI/Toyota Pays CA Workers $6M in Class Action Discrimination Lawsuit Settlement" »

Last week, on July 26, marked the 21st anniversary the Americans with Disabilities Act being signed into law (ADA)--the landmark civil rights legislation aimed to make this country more inclusive of disabled Americans, in their right to participate fully in employment opportunities without experiencing disability discrimination.

As our Costa Mesa, California employment lawyers blog reported last year, under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, employers cannot discriminate against qualified individuals with disabilities in hiring, job application, compensation, employment training, job advancement, job termination, and other conditions, employment terms, and privileges.

Since its enactment, the ADA has sought to make the workplace an equal playing field for disabled employees, allowing them to pursue the same opportunities as non-disabled people--although according to the White House, recent high unemployment rates for disabled employees show that there is more work to be done. Last year, President Obama announced that he was signing an Executive Order that would turn the federal government into a solid employment option for disabled individuals.

This year, in anniversary of the ADA, the President's administration announced new plans to continue to increase employment opportunities for disabled persons and to strive to make the government a more open and accessible place to work for all citizens. The administration is specifically working on revising a plan to improve compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act--requiring that both inside and outside of the government the federal agencies' electronic and information technology is available and accessible to disabled people for employment purposes.

Continue reading "Federal Government Aims to Increase Employment for Disabled People on ADA Anniversary" »

A U.S. Representative is being sued in a disability discrimination lawsuit development that our California employment attorneys have been following, after a former employee claims she was denied reasonable accommodation in the workplace for her disability.

According to the lawsuit, Mona Floyd was hired in 2010 as legislative director and chief counsel for Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, (D-Texas), with the assurance that her disability needs would be accommodated. Floyd claims that Jackson Lee had known about her disability since 2006, when she began working for the congresswoman. After Floyd was hired to the new position in 2010, Jackson Lee's then chief of staff reportedly assured Floyd that her reasonable accommodations would be honored.

Floyd suffers from the visual disability called monocular vision, which causes eye fatigue, headaches, strain, making her read 20 to 30 percent slower than the average person. Floyd's reading speed is also reduced if she is not given an proper chance to rest her eyes throughout the workday, as the eye fatigue causes reduced comprehension and concentration, as well as physical fatigue.

Jackson Lee, is known for publicly supporting the Americans with Disabilities Act, the federal act that prohibits disability discrimination in the workplace. Under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), employers must reasonably accommodate the known mental or physical limitations of a disabled individual, applicant or employee who is qualified for the job--unless accommodating the disabled employee would cause undue hardship to employer's business operations.

Continue reading "U.S. Representative Sued for Disability Discrimination" »

According to a recent press release that our Santa Ana labor and employment attorneys have been following, Verizon Communications will reportedly pay $20 million to settle a class action discrimination lawsuit, after the company was sued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for failing to accommodate disabled employees.

The lawsuit was reportedly filed against the telecommunications giant and twenty-four Verizon subsidiaries--for denying reasonable accommodations to hundreds of disabled employees, by either disciplining or firing them when they needed more time off than Verizon's leave policy allowed.

Before this lawsuit, Verizon had an employment policy in place that reportedly set a maximum number of employee absences in place. The company would not make exceptions for disabled employees who needed reasonable accommodations in order to work for the company.

The EEOC claims that Verizon violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by refusing to make exceptions and accommodate employees with disabilities under its "no fault" attendance plans--which disciplined an employee if they accumulated a designated number of "chargeable absences." The EEOC stated that Verizon failed to provide reasonable accommodations for disabled people, especially when "chargeable absences" were caused by disabilities.

Continue reading "Verizon's Class Action Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Settles for $20 Million" »