California Employment Lawyers Blog

Several former employees of an auto plant that was shut down recently in California, sued the plant and its parent company, Toyota Motor Corp. yesterday, stating that they were denied access to fair and comprehensive severance agreements, because employment-sustained injuries kept the employees from working prior to the closure.

The New United Motor Manufacturing Inc., or Nummi, was established in 1984 as a business venture between Toyota and General Motors, in Freemont, California. The lawsuit claims that Nummi and Toyota Motor Corp., allegedly engaged in discrimination against disabled and injured workers because they were classified as ineligible to receive comprehensive severance packages if they weren't consistently working for the six-month period prior to the close of the factory.

According to the lawsuit, many Toyota car and truck assembly workers, who were laid-off, but worked consistently prior to the plant's closing, received a monetary settlement of around $21,175 each, plus a bonus payment that averaged to around $32,000 depending on the number of years they dedicated to the plant.

These agreements were reportedly not available, or were only partially available to workers on leave for disability from the plant, and unable to work prior to the plant closure. This reportedly constituted a major loss for those disabled workers, some of whom had worked at the plant for 25 years, and had been injured within the final six months. Many funds for retraining and employment services were also not available to these workers.

Continue reading "Workers Sue Toyota for Disability Discrimination and Full Severance" »

In yesterday's blog, our California Employment and Labor Lawyers discussed a recent lawsuit involving the issue of fragrance sensitivities in the workplace, and how fragrance sensitivities can be considered as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, (ADA).

The Job Accommodation Network (JAN), is provided by the U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Disability Employment Policy, to help employers comply with Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to find reasonable accommodations for disabled employees.

JAN states that fragrance sensitivity can mean that an employee has an actual allergy to a fragrance or a simple irritation to a fragrance, that manifests through absorption, breathing, or ingestion. The first allergic indicator of a reaction to a fragrance is often a skin rash after using a perfumed product, although other reactions can also include nausea, hives, asthma attacks or symptoms, coughing, wheezing, runny nose, itchy eyes, or difficulty breathing.

According to JAN, there is no list of medical conditions that comprise all disabilities under the ADA, rather a general definition of disability that is answered on a case-by-case basis, with consideration on how the employee is affected by his/her medical condition. In this way, some employees with fragrance sensitivities can be protected under the ADA and some will not.

Continue reading "Fragrance Sensitivities and Disability Definitions under the ADA" »

In recent employment news that our Riverside, California Employment Attorneys have been following, a city planner in Detroit, Michigan sued the city in a federal employment lawsuit, claiming that her colleague's perfume and fragranced room spray made it hard for her to effectively do her job, as the scents caused serious health reactions.

According to the lawsuit, McBride, an employee of the city, complained to her supervisor that she was sensitive to chemicals, and that the room scent and perfume of a colleague made it difficult for her to breath--thus making it hard for her to do her job. Her allergic reactions to the scents reportedly induced nausea, coughing and migraines. After her boss didn't respond to her complaints, McBride sued the city under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

In a recent CBS morning report, guest lawyer Joelle Sharman claimed that employees have the right to breathe without irritation while working to effectively do their job. If an employee complains to their supervisor that another employees perfume is causing a health condition that interferes with their ability to work, than it is the boss's responsibility to provide reasonable accommodation for that employee.

The city reportedly fought the lawsuit, claiming that there was no medical diagnosis of her condition and that she is not disabled.

Continue reading "City Employee Sues Over Perfume Stink in the Workplace" »

In recent employment discrimination news that our Chino Hills Employment Attorneys have been following, A&A Contracting, based in St. Louis, Missouri has agreed to settle a disability discrimination brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (EEOC).

The lawsuit accused the construction company of violating Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), by firing Rick Wells, a permanent construction worker, because of his history of cancer and kidney and liver problems.

The ADA prohibits employers from discriminating against employees and individuals applying for employment who are disabled, who are considered disabled, or who have a history or record of a disability.

The EEOC suit alleges that the Wells had been given a clean bill of health by his doctor, and had been given permission to work, but after Wells applied for the company's health insurance coverage the company reportedly became aware of his history of health issues and wrongfully terminated his employment. Wells was reportedly humiliated for being fired for his perceived disability.

Continue reading "Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Settled--Construction Company to Pay Back Wages" »

Our Long Beach, California, Labor and Employment Lawyers are following the lawsuit settlement announced today by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), where a worker with an intellectual disability was allegedly discriminated against by fellow McDonald's employees at a franchise that was once owned and operated by Alstrun LLP.

The lawsuit, brought by the EEOC, alleged that Timothy Artis, a worker for the McDonald's franchise, experienced illegal harassment based on his intellectual disability, even though he was fully capable of performing his job duties as lobby and lot worker.

The suit claims that Artis was subjected disability discrimination and harassment that included offensive name-calling and comments by colleagues, managers, and supervisors, as well as physical abuse and threats. In one harassing incident Artis was threatened with a box cutter by a co-worker.

After continual complaints were made to the McDonald's supervisors and officials by Artis's mother, Artis quit his job, because the restaurant chain neglected to take the necessary action to protect him from the physical and verbal abuse in the workplace.

Continue reading "Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Settlement--McDonald's Franchise Will Pay Employee $90,000" »

Our employment and labor attorneys at HOWARD | NASSIRI, PC have been following the recent announcement of a lawsuit settlement, in which the California-based Akeena Solar Company will pay a former employee $30,000 to settle her disability discrimination lawsuit.

According to the suit, brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Gladys Tellez was hired as a payroll and accounts technician in November of 2006. Tellez is a 44-year old Latina employee, who has a left arm that is paralyzed, and was reportedly fired within a few hours of her first day on the job after her supervisor discovered the disability. The EEOC supported Tellez and her case, after determining that she was perfectly capable and qualified of performing her necessary job description, despite having a disability.

Akeena Solar will pay Tellez $30,000 in monetary damages, according to the consent decree, as well as commit to posting a notice detailing the company's compliance to the ADA, hold annual training to prevent disability discrimination, and report any disability discrimination complaints that surface in the next three years.

The EEOC stated that this resolution will hopefully encourage employers to give future disabled workers a chance to prove their own value and abilities in the workplace--whereas Tellez wasn't even given a full day to prove her value as an employee.

Continue reading "California Solar Power Company Settles in Disability Discrimination Lawsuit" »

In a recent blog, our Anaheim-based Employment Attorneys discussed a class action disability discrimination lawsuit settlement announced last year between Sears, Roebuck and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). In September 2009, Sears agreed to a $6.2 million settlement under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) for allegedly maintaining a policy for workmans compensation leave that was inflexible, and involved the termination of employees without providing them reasonable accommodations for their disabilities. This case was the largest single lawsuit settlement in EEOC history under the ADA.

Last week, the EEOC announced the court approval of the distribution of a $6,200,000 compensation fund, that is being carried out according to the terms of the consent decree approved last year.

Under the consent decree terms, many employees who were terminated under the company's inflexible workers' leave policy were given claim forms to report back to the EEOC the extent of their disabilities, their professional ability to come back to work for Sears, and whether there has been any effort by Sears to facilitate their return to work. The result of the claim forms found 235 individual workers were qualified to be awarded in the settlement, with over twenty workers who did not qualify. The entire settlement fund will be distributed to the Sears employees--the EEOC will not retain any of the amount.

The EEOC reports that as a result of this longstanding disability discrimination lawsuit, originally filed in November 2004, there has been a positive effect from the consent decree. The EEOC believes that Sears has improved the process of taking a workers' compensation leave, and has lawfully posted employee notices covering the consent decree--ultimately benefiting the Sears employees and creating a stronger human resource process for employees.

Continue reading "Sears, Roebuck Disability Settlement is Distributed--Court Approves $6.2 Million in Damages to Employees" »

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-based Employment and Labor Lawyers have been following the settlement announced today by the U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC)--where Economy Finance, a personal loan company, will pay a former loan clerk $65,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit.

According to the suit, a loan clerk for the company was refused the option of returning to work until she submitted to a medical exam that would detect viruses. The company insisted that the employee undergo virus testing, after they discovered that her husband had a medical condition related to Hepatitis C.

The EEOC, representing the case, protested that this medical exam was not related to her employment, and that her husband's disability did not affect the clerk's job performance or her ability to do her job effectively and safely. The EEOC alleged that Economy Finance discharged the employee because she refused to participate in the medical exam--and accused her of being disabled by association, because of her relationship with her husband.

According to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) it is illegal to fire or discharge an employee who is considered to be disabled through association with someone who is disabled or believed to have a disability. Employee medical exams must be job-related, in direct correlation to as the EEOC claims "objective medical evidence" and workers should be judged on performance and abilities, rather than stereotypes and unfounded fear through association.

Continue reading "Former Loan Company Clerk Wins $65,000 Settlement in Disability Bias Suit" »

In a previous blog from October, our California Labor and Employment Lawyers discussed the Obama administration's initiative to create equal employment federal job opportunities for individuals with disabilities --opportunities that welcome the special abilities of all qualified employees and help them to grow to their fullest employment potential.

Obama proclaimed October, National Disability Employment Awareness Month, and called upon the Federal Government, the nation's largest employer, to set a positive example and implement new employment practices and policies to increase opportunities for disabled workers.

In advancing Obama's campaign to increase the federal hiring of disabled employees, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (EEOC) has released a new set of guidelines to promote individuals with disabilities--made specifically for each participant in the federal hiring process in a clear, simple and straightforward way.

The EEOC-issued guides are called the five "ABCs of Schedule A" guides, and are made for applicants with disabilities, hiring managers, human resources professionals, service providers, disability program managers and selective placement coordinators. According to Christine M. Griffin, Acting Vice Chair for EEOC, agencies have to work harder to encourage the participation of individuals with severe disabilities in the federal workplace, as the participation rates are rapidly declining.

Continue reading "Guides to Promote Federal Hiring of Workers with Disabilities" »

In recent employment and labor news, our Anaheim Employment Attorneys have been following The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) announcement of the $142,000 disability discrimination lawsuit settlement between Hudson Valley Hospital Center, and Gorianne Romano, a nurse with diabetes.

The lawsuit accused the hospital of discriminating against Romano based on her disability--Type I "brittle" diabetes, after Romano reportedly experienced a diabetic coma from her condition, and was treated there.

According to the EEOC, Romano's doctor requested that she needed a consistent schedule to help her gain control over her diabetes. As a part-time employee health nurse, Romano requested to work three days in a row, as opposed to alternating days. The hospital failed to grant Romano a reasonable accommodation for a flexible schedule, stating that it unduly disrupted the hospital's business operations. The EEOC charged that the hospital was endangering Romano's health--and effectively terminating her employment--by failing to accommodate her modified work request.

By failing to grant a reasonable accommodation, and terminating Romano's employment, the hospital violated Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)--which prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals based on disabilities in the workplace. The EEOC claimed that if the hospital had fulfilled its legal obligation to find a reasonable accommodation for Romano's diabetes, this lawsuit could have been avoided.

Continue reading "Community Hospital to Pay $142,000 in Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Settlement" »

In a post from last week, our Anaheim, California Employment Attorneys discussed the recent passing of The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA)--the new law banning discrimination based on genetic information in the workplace, and the use of genetic information with health insurance.

Genetic information is defined as the information about an individual's genetic testing as well as the genetic testing and medical history of an individual's family. Information involving the disease, condition, or disorder of an individual's family members is considered genetic information because it is used to determine the likelihood of whether someone has an increased risk of developing a potential health problem in the future.

Title I of GINA addresses the use of genetic information with health insurers and group plans--where a person's genetic makeup cannot be used against them for the basis of denying coverage and setting insurance rate premiums or deductibles based on genetic information. The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and the Treasury are responsible for issuing all regulations for Title I.

Under Title II of GINA, it is illegal for employers to discriminate based on genetic information with any aspect of employment, from hiring, paying, promoting, layoffs or firing. Genetic testing is not allowed by employers, and employees cannot be forced to reveal the medical histories of their family--as genetic information does not inform an employer about an employee's work abilities. Title II of GINA bans the use of genetic information to make decisions based on employment, and limits the employer's accessibility and disclosure of an individual's genetic information.

Continue reading "EEOC enforces GINA--Workplace Discrimination Based on Genetic Information is Illegal" »

In this week's California employment and labor news, a former employee of the California Employment Development Department (EDD), Audrey Renee Bell, pleaded guilty of mail fraud by certifying false disability claims for friends and defrauding the state--an amount that totaled more than $110,000.

According to United States Attorney Benjamin B. Wagner, Bell entered the guilty plea on Monday after a trial that lasted two weeks. The guilty plea was entered before a Sacramento federal court judge--to ten counts of mail fraud violation.

Bell, 49, was employed as a disability insurance program representative (DIPR) in the Van Nuys, California office of the EDD. As a California state agency, the EDD pays disability insurance benefits to disabled California workers. Bell was in charge of reviewing and authorizing payments on disability claims.

The Fresno Bee reported that from mid-2003 until 2006, Bell approved false disability claims in Los Angeles County to friends, and entered false information into the EDD computer system-- defrauding the EDD of more than $110,000.

According to the state investigation, phone calls made to the EDD fraud hotline reported that an EDD employment agent had unlawfully given disability insurance benefits to friends who had full time jobs. These calls were traced back to Bell.

Continue reading "California Female Worker Pleads Guilty to Defrauding State in Disability Claims" »

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced last week that the commission with be playing an important role in President Obama's goal to advance equal employment opportunities for disabled workers.

Our California Labor and Employment Lawyers have been reading about the Obama administration's plan to create town hall meetings with the EEOC in four national cities, including San Francisco, California. The EEOC will help create federal regulation and hiring procedure workshops in order to give individuals with disabilities equal employment opportunities for federal jobs--opportunities that welcome the special skills, abilities, and talents of all qualified employees.

On September 30, President Obama officially proclaimed October the National Disability Employment Awareness Month, 2009. Obama's administration makes great efforts to promote change for every American, and this special disability awareness month honors the 54 million disabled people living across the country who deserve to have fair access to employment. President Obama proposed that during National Disability Employment Awareness Month, we should make a new commitment to ourselves to implement "effective policies and practices that increase employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities."

As the nation's largest employer, Obama called upon the Federal Government to set a positive example by implementing employment practices and policies that are effective in increasing opportunities for disabled workers--by helping them to grow to their fullest potential, with their own distinctive skills and qualifications.

The EEOC will also work closely with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to produce four meetings, in San Francisco, Philadelphia, Chicago and New Orleans, to discuss information and collect thoughts and comments about regulations regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Each meeting will hold two sessions--one for advocates on disability and one for employers.

Continue reading "Obama Champions Disability Rights--EEOC to Hold Town-Hall Meetings in California" »

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced this week the approval of a consent decree by Federal District Judge Wayne Andersen, resolving the $6.2 million lawsuit against Sears, Roebuck and Co. under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA)--the largest ADA single lawsuit settlement amount in EEOC history.

As Orange County, California, Employment Lawyers, we have been following this case--and the EEOC's fight to uphold the American's With Disabilities Act, protecting employees from disability discrimination in the workplace.

According to the EEOC's press release, the class action lawsuit was filed in 2004, accusing Sears of providing an inflexible worker's compensation leave exhaustion policy, as well as terminating employees without attempting first to provide reasonable accommodations for their disabilities.

John Rowe, Chicago District Director for the EEOC, claimed that this class action lawsuit stemmed from a discrimination charge filed by John Bava, a former technician at Sears. Bava sustained an injury while working at an Illinois- based Sears, and took a worker's compensation leave of absence. Although still injured from the job, Bava tried to return back to work repeatedly. Instead of giving Bava a possibility for returning to work with his disability, Sears terminating his job when his worker's compensation leave expired.

John Hendrickson, Regional Attorney of Chicago District's EEOC Office, stated in the EEOC press release that prior to the trial, hundreds of employees in similar circumstances were discovered--workers who had also taken leave for disability, and were fired by Sears--not reasonably accommodated as required by ADA law. Many of these employees only discovered that they had been fired, after their discount cards were rejected while shopping at local Sears retail stores.

Along with the $6.2 million settlement, the consent decree includes an injunction against violating the ADA, as well as retaliation. Sears will also be required to change its workers compensation leave policy, provide the EEOC with written reports detailing workers compensation practices as well as ADA employer compliance, make the decree visible at Sears locations, and train all employees on ADA law.

Stuart Ishimaru, the EEOC's acting chairman stated that this case proves that after nearly twenty years of the ADA enactment, the rights of individuals with disabilities in the workplace are still compromised. He also claimed that this record-setting settlement sends a strong message that the EEOC will protect workers' rights and advance equal employment opportunities for disabled individuals.

Sears, Roebuck to Pay $6.2 Million for Disability Bias, EEOC Press Release, September 29, 2009

EEOC Reaches $6.2M Disability Settlement with Sears, Business Insurance.com, September 29, 2009

Sears Roebuck Agrees to Record $6.2M ADA Settlement with EEOC, ADA Journal.com, September 29, 2009

Related Web Resources:

EEOC

Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, As Amended (ADA)

Continue reading "Sears, Roebuck Settles in Record $6.2 Million Disability Discrimination Lawsuit with EEOC" »