California Employment Lawyers Blog

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" »

In a recent Los Angeles, California employment lawyers blog, our attorneys discussed the Los Angeles employment lawsuit filed by television and movie star Charlie Sheen against Warner Brothers Studio and Chuck Lorre, the Executive Producer of the popular television series Two and a Half Men, that featured Sheen as a central character until this spring.

According to news reports from last week, Sheen and Warner Brothers are finalizing the multimillion-dollar settlement that will end the very public battle that has continued over the past few months--after Sheen hurled public insults against Lorre for being fired from the show, leading to the cancellation of Two and a Half Men for the rest of the season.

Warner Brothers stated that Sheen's contract was terminated after health issues led to his inability to perform his duties as a performer for the show. He was reportedly fired in March for his failure to report to set and perform due to drug usage, for trashing a hotel room, and for his public statements against Chuck Lorre.

Sheen sued Warner Brothers and Lorre in March of this year, claiming that his television contract termination came from Lorre in order to serve Lorre's self-interest and ego--and accused Lorre of breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, retaliation and other employment charges. The lawsuit asked for $100 million in punitive damages.

Continue reading "Hollywood Star Charlie Sheen and Warner Brothers Settle Multimillion Dollar Lawsuit" »

The California Fair Employment and Housing Commission (FEHC) has recently awarded a California regional sales manager the largest administrative payment ever ordered in a discrimination case, after the disabled employee was fired while recovering from cancer.

Our Carson, California employment lawyers have been following the development of Charles Wideman's case, an employee who was fired while recuperating from cancer under the pretext that he wasn't investing enough time traveling to meet customers while working for the electrical supply company, Acme Electric.

According to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, (DFEH), which represented Wideman, Acme Electric must pay a record $846,300 in the California disability discrimination lawsuit for Wideman's losses--$748,571 for lost wages, $22,729 for out of pocket expenses, $50,000 for emotional distress, and a $25,000 administrative fine to the State's General Fund for engaging in what the California commission described as deplorable conduct.

Wideman was reportedly a veteran sales manager for the electrical company, heading Acme's largest sales region from February of 2004 until March of 2008, at which point his employment was terminated at the age of 59. Wideman went through surgery for kidney cancer in 2006 and then prostate cancer in 2007, returning to work within a few weeks of both operations, but had to reduce his traveling while he underwent further cancer treatments. Wideman reportedly requested accommodation for this period of time, that went unacknowledged and was refused.

Continue reading "Fired Cancer Survivor Receives Record $846K in California DFEH Discrimination Lawsuit" »

According to recent U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) news, that our Riverside employment attorneys have been following, the commission has filed a lawsuit against a Walgreens drugstore for California disability discrimination, on behalf of a store clerk who suffers from diabetes in the San Francisco area--whose employment was terminated for taking and eating chips from the store in order to quickly stabilize her levels of blood sugar.

The EEOC claims that Josefina Hernandez was an outstanding employee with almost 18 years of service with the company, and no record of any employment problems. Walgreens reportedly knew about her diabetes. The lawsuit accuses Walgreens of disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), for deciding to terminate Hernandez because of her diabetes, after eating chips because her blood sugar was low.

According to the lawsuit, in 2008, Hernandez was working as a cashier, when she felt an attack of hypoglycemia coming on, a state produced by an abnormally low level of blood sugar or glucose, commonly associated with diabetes. The Mayo clinic states that immediate treatment of hypoglycemia involves taking quick steps to stabilize your blood sugar back to a normal range, by eating foods that are high in sugar or taking medication to avoid a diabetic episode or emergency.

Hernandez reportedly grabbed a bag of chips that cost $1.39 and quickly ate them, paying for the chips as soon as she could on the same day, after she finished her duty as a cashier. Hernandez claimed that she almost always carries a piece of candy in her pocket for emergency situations, but she didn't have anything with her during her shift on that day. She stated that she knew she needed to act quickly to treat the hypoglycemia, so she reached for a bag of chips and paid for them as soon as she could.

Continue reading "EEOC Sues Walgreens for Disability Discrimination" »

In recent news that our Costa Mesa labor and employment attorneys have been watching, a Los Angeles, a California judge has advised Nicollette Sheridan, the former star of the popular television show Desperate Housewives, to settle her wrongful termination lawsuit against ABC and the show's creator and executive producer Marc Cherry, that she filed last year.

This week, in Los Angeles Superior Court, Sheridan and her legal team were told by the judge that they were going to spend a lot of money on this wrongful termination case--urging them to settle.

The Superior Court Judge also limited the damages that Sheridan could receive if she would win at the trial--ruling that Sheridan can only ask for damages for one year of pay on the show, instead of the entire run of the series. The show will start its eighth season this fall, and it will be the show's last.

The wrongful termination lawsuit has also reportedly been pared down since last year, as the judge threw out Sheridan's harassment charges, and ruled this week that the television actress could not make reference to Cherry's alleged rude behavior in the trial.

Continue reading "'Desperate Housewives' Sued for Wrongful Termination by Hollywood Television Star" »

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) protects employees who are forty years old and older from workplace age discrimination. As our Carson employment lawyer blog has reported in a related post, it is a violation of the ADEA to discriminate against an employee based on age in hiring, training, promotion, employment assignments, layoffs, firing, or in compensation or benefits. Harassment or retaliation based on age is also against the law.

In recent class action age discrimination news, 3M, the global technology company, has agreed to compensate a class of former employees with $3 million, after a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged the company with age discrimination by unlawfully laying off employees who were over the age of 45.

According to the lawsuit, in a series of reductions in force (RIFs), 3M illegally laid off hundreds of employees who were over the age of 45 in a three-year span between 2003 and 2006. 3M reportedly extended the lay offs to many older employees who received high compensations to save money, and let workers in salaried positions go. The EEOC claims that the older employees were also denied leadership training, and were let go to allow younger leaders to move forward. An email was also discovered by the EEOC that detailed then-CEO Jim McNerney's idea of leadership development, which included developing 30-year-old workers who had the potential to be General Managers.

Under the consent decree 3M will pay $3 million to around 290 former employees in monetary relief, pending judicial approval. 3M will also reportedly create a review process for termination decisions and will implement preventative training on how to eliminate age discrimination in the workplace. The technology company will also post job openings for new positions that have not been advertised previously, in order to enable older employees to apply for the opportunity.

Continue reading "3M Settles Class Action Age Discrimination Lawsuit for $3 Million" »

In a recent Costa Mesa employment lawyers blog, our attorneys discussed a current dwarfism and disability discrimination lawsuit filed against Starbucks, after the coffee giant was accused of wrongfully terminating a disabled job trainee with dwarfism who asked for reasonable accommodation in order to perform her barista job functions.

Last week Starbucks reportedly agreed to settle the disability discrimination lawsuit, brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), by agreeing to pay $75,000 and other significant relief to Elsa Sallard--the employee who was allegedly denied the opportunity to work for Starbucks due to her disability.

According to the lawsuit, Sallard applied to work as a Starbucks barista after the job description stated that no prior experience was necessary. During the job orientation, Sallard, who is physically small due to dwarfism, reportedly asked if she could use a small stool or stepladder in order to help her perform some of the barista job functions that included serving customers and preparing orders. The Starbucks manager reportedly denied the request for reasonable accommodation and terminated her employment on the same day, citing that Sallard would pose a threat or potential danger to other employees and customers.

As our Carson labor and employment lawyers have discussed previously, under Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), it is illegal for employers to discriminate against qualified individuals who have disabilities in hiring, employment training, firing and other terms and conditions of employment. Employers are required by the ADA to reasonably accommodate disabled employees, only if the worker's request does create an undue hardship on the employer's business operations.

According to the EEOC, Starbucks violated the ADA by denying Sallard the use of a stepladder, or a small step stool as a reasonable accommodation.

Continue reading "Starbucks Agrees to Pay $75K in Dwarfism and Disability Discrimination Lawsuit Settlement" »

According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (EEOC) religious discrimination is treating an individual employee or applicant in the workplace differently because of their religious beliefs.

As our Newport Beach labor and employment lawyers blog has discussed previously, Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is illegal to discriminate against people in the workplace who belong to traditional and organized religions, and sincerely hold religious, moral or ethical beliefs in any aspect of employment, including hiring, job assignments, firing, work promotions, training, layoffs, and any other employment terms or conditions.

Under federal law, employers are required to give reasonable accommodation to an employee's religious beliefs and practices, by making reasonable adjustments to the work environment--allowing an employee to practice their religion, unless it would cause burden or hardship on the employee's business operations. Common religious accommodations include modifying workplace policies or practices, flexible scheduling, shift substitutions, or job reassignments. Employers must also give reasonable accommodation to an employee's appearance or grooming practices, including wearing head coverings like a Muslim headscarf or hijab, as we have discussed in a previous Santa Ana employment lawyers blog, or wearing certain hairstyles or facial hair.

A recent example of alleged religious discrimination in the workplace was in recent news after a Muslim security guard refused to shave his beard when he began working for American Patriot Security in 2009. When Abdulkadir Omar reportedly began working for the company, he was not told upon hiring that he would have to shave his beard in order to keep his job. Omar wears a beard as part of this Islamic faith, and six months after he was hired, a supervisor informed him that he would have to comply with company policy and shave. Omar continued to work for the company until he was allegedly wrongfully terminated from his employment for not shaving his beard.

Continue reading "Religious Discrimination in the Workplace and Reasonable Accommodation" »

In recent Hollywood, California employment news, Jill Killion, the former assistant general counsel working for the Directors Guild of America (DGA), has filed a gender discrimination lawsuit against the DGA, claiming that she experienced a drastic salary discrepancy in comparison to a male colleague with similar job duties, and after reporting the alleged discrimination was retaliated against by being wrongfully terminated from her position.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, Killion filed the lawsuit last week, claiming that she was paid significantly less than David Dreyfus, DGA associate general counsel, who held the same employment responsibilities as Killion, although he had a more senior title.

Killion reportedly began working for the DGA from June of 2008 until June of 2009, and was paid $75,000 in 2008 and then $78,000 in 2009. In comparison Dreyfus allegedly made $131,181 in 2008 and then $152,000 in 2009.

The sex-bias discrimination lawsuit states that David Korduner, DGA general counsel, claimed that he wasn't aware of the difference between Dreyfus' and Killion's job position, and did not know what career steps Killion should take to achieve eventual promotion. The complaint claims that Killion reviewed the DGA's LM-2 informational report filings with the Department of Labor (DOL), a requirement for unions covered by under Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act to submit financial statements to the DOL every year. Killion allegedly found that according to the LM-2 filing, in 2008, the DGA engaged in employment practices that compensated male employees at a higher pay rate than female employees.

Continue reading "Hollywood DGA Lawyer Files Gender Discrimination Lawsuit Against Guild" »

In a recent Santa Ana employment lawyer blog, our attorneys discussed the high-profile age discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuit filed by Los Angeles Clippers former Manager, Elgin Baylor, who was an executive for the NBA team for 22 years.

Last week, Baylor's wrongful termination lawsuit was rejected unanimously by a Los Angeles County Superior Court jury, after Baylor accused the Clippers organization of age and race discrimination, as well as humiliation, after receiving a letter in 2008 asking him to retire and become a consultant.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the jury, comprised of five women and seven men, voted unanimously against Baylor's allegations that the President Andy Roeser and Clippers owner Donald Sterling provided a hostile work environment.

In the lawsuit, Baylor accused Sterling and Roeser of age discrimination, and as longtime head of player personnel and as Clippers executive vice president and general manager, he sought nearly $2 million in mental distress and economic damages in the wrongful termination and age discrimination lawsuit.

Continue reading "Los Angeles Clippers Cleared in Wrongful Termination and Age Discrimination Lawsuit" »

In a recent Orange County, California employment lawyer blog, our attorneys discussed a wrongful termination lawsuit filed by Elgin Baylor, the 76-year old former general manager of the Los Angeles Clippers, who claimed to have been fired based on age and race discrimination.

This week in Los Angeles Superior Court, Baylor testified in his wrongful termination lawsuit against the Clippers organization, stating that after being an executive in the organization for 22 years, he felt humiliated and insulted when he received a letter in 2008 asking him to retire and become a consultant.

Baylor is suing the basketball team, President Andy Roeser and owner Donald Sterling for wrongful termination based on age discrimination, claiming that both Sterling and Roeser would continually bring up his age in conversations, asking him how much longer he was going to work.

In another statement, Baylor reportedly claimed that he was promised in 1993 by Sterling that he would be "a lifer" with the Clippers, and was then shocked when many of his duties and responsibilities were later taken over by Roeser, Sterling and the then-coach Mike Dunleavy, prior to being fired.

Continue reading "Elgin Baylor's Wrongful Termination Lawsuit Heard in LA Superior Court--Clippers Accused of Age Discrimination" »

Actor Charlie Sheen continued to make Hollywood headlines this week by filing a Los Angeles, California employment lawsuit yesterday against Warner Brothers Studio and Chuck Lorre, the executive producer of Two and a Half Men, a hugely successful television show that has starred Sheen since 2003.

Screen has held the celebrity spotlight in recent months, after rehab and hospital visits led to Two and a Half Men's hiatus in January. Last month, Warner Brothers canceled the hit television comedy for the rest of the season, reportedly after Sheen lashed out at Lorre with public verbal attacks.

According to reports that our San Bernardino County employment attorneys have been following, Sheen was fired on Monday, for committing a felony involving a "moral turpitude" which Warner Brothers claimed in a statement included trashing New York's Plaza Hotel, engaging in cocaine binges, failing to report to set and perform because drug usage, and for hurling recent public insults against the show's creator, Chuck Lorre.

Sheen claims that he has filed his employment lawsuit on behalf of the Two and a Half Men cast and crew, and is asking for $100 million in punitive damages.

The lawsuit states that Sheen's contract termination came from Lorre, in order to serve Lorre's ego and self-interest, making Sheen the scapegoat for his own conduct--taking money away from the dedicated cast and crew of the show by canceling the production. The lawsuit also accuses Warner Brothers and Lorre of breaching his contract, retaliation, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, among other employment charges.

Continue reading "Hollywood Actor Charlie Sheen Slaps Warner Bros. with $100M Lawsuit for Contract Termination" »

Last month, a Los Angeles, California Superior court judge tentatively rejected the bids by the NBA and the Los Angeles Clippers to have former Clippers general manager Elgin Baylor's age discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuit dismissed.

At the January 2011 hearing, that our Newport Beach employment attorneys have been following, Judge Kenneth R. Freeman reportedly issued a tentative ruling denying the motions for dismissal, but agreed to schedule another hearing for February 3, to hear the final arguments and make a final ruling on whether the wrongful termination and age and race discrimination lawsuit should move to trial. Freeman's decision was expected to be released last Thursday.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Baylor was the Clippers' executive vice president and general manager for 22 years, until 2008. Baylor is known for helping the Clippers qualify for the NBA playoffs four times during his 22 seasons as general manager. Baylor, who is now 76, filed a lawsuit in February of 2009, claiming that he was wrongfully terminated due to age and race discrimination.

Baylor also claimed that he was grossly underpaid compared to the compensation scheme for every other team general manager in the NBA. The defendants include the Clippers, Donald Sterling, the Clippers owner, Andy Roeser, team president, and the NBA.

As our Newport Beach, California employment attorneys have discussed in a recent California employment blog, it is illegal, under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), to discriminate against individuals who are 40-years-old or older in any employment terms, conditions, or privileges, including hiring, firing, employment layoffs, job promotion, compensation, benefits, job assignments, and training.

Continue reading "Elgin Baylor Sues LA Clippers for Wrongful Termination, Age and Race Discrimination" »

In breaking employment news from this week, a wrongful termination settlement was reached in the firing of a medication technician, whose employment was ended after she made critical remarks about her boss on Facebook.

Our Temecula, California employment attorneys have been following the recent announcement that that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has reached an undisclosed settlement with the American Medical Response, who reportedly fired Dawnmarie Souza in 2009 after she wrote a Facebook message on her home computer criticizing a supervisor who made her aware that a customer was dissatisfied with her job performance. Souza's Facebook message was reportedly filled with profanity, and used the company's code word for a "psychiatric patient" to refer to her boss. Her Facebook posting received responses from her co-workers expressing support and approval for her rant.

Souza was reportedly fired because of complaints about her work, but the NLRB, an independent federal agency created by Congress to administer the National Labor Relations Act in 1935, filed a complaint against the ambulance services company in October of 2009, in defense of Souza, claiming that her Facebook comments complaining about her work were protected under federal labor laws.

The federal agency reportedly filed a complaint on behalf of Souza, claiming that under the National Labor Relations Act, employees have the legal right to discuss their employment terms and conditions with colleagues and others online and elsewhere. The national agency also accused American Medical Response of failing to provide Souza with union representation while being interviewed about her Facebook comments.

Continue reading " Facebook-related Wrongful Termination Lawsuit Settled by Federal Agency" »

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously on a retaliation ban limits case this week, that our Riverside labor and employment attorneys discussed in a recent blog, stating that a company can be sued for retaliation by terminating an employee's fiancée.

In the original lawsuit, Miriam Regalado, a female engineer at North American Stainless plant, filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) claiming that as one of only a few female engineers, she had experienced gender-based discrimination by her supervisors, and failed to receive the same pay raises as her male colleagues in similar positions.

As our Carson employment lawyers discussed in a related sex discrimination blog, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is against the law for an employer to retaliate against an employee for reporting gender-based discrimination.

At the time of the complaint, Regalado was engaged to Eric Thompson, (they are now married), a metallurgical engineer who also worked at the plant. Thompson was fired three weeks after Regalado's EEOC sex-discrimination complaint against their mutual employer was revealed.

Thompson decided to file his own retaliation claim, but his lawsuit was thrown out of the federal appeals courts because according to federal law, a retaliation claim is not permitted by a plaintiff who did not engage in opposing the unlawful employment practice, such as protesting the gender-based treatment his fiancée experienced, or supporting her in the complaint.

Continue reading "Supreme Court Rules Third-Party Victim of Retaliation Has the Right to Sue" »