California Employment Lawyers Blog

Gender-based Discrimination and Retaliation Lawsuit Settlement-- Gravel Company to Pay Nearly $500K

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 09:09:37 -0800

As Santa Ana Labor and Employment Attorneys, we have been following the recent announcement that Oldcastle SW Group, Inc., operating as United Companies of Mesa County, has settled a sex discrimination and retaliation lawsuit for nearly $500,000, that was filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of a former female employee.

According to the lawsuit, the female employee was hired in 1998 by Delta Sand and Gravel in Colorado (now part of Old Castle Group, and doing business as United Companies of Mesa County), to drive a truck, dispatch trucks, batch concrete, perform plant manager duties, and act as a quality control technician--the role in which she remained until she was allegedly wrongfully terminated.

The suit charges that the female worker spent a majority of her employment doing what is largely considered to be the "job of a man." The employee alleged that once she became a quality control technician, she started experiencing blatant sex-based discrimination, with workers and managers making harassing comments based on gender and engaging in sex based name-calling that interfered with her ability to perform her job duties.

Many of the employee's male co-workers reportedly witnessed the sex-based discrimination and offered to support her if she filed a complaint. After complaining to the management, and naming the male witnesses, the men confirmed her allegations, although admitted fear that they might be retaliated against for standing up for their female co-worker. According to the complaint filed by the EEOC, the men were subsequently subjected to serious retaliation, including name-calling, harassment, and threats to keep quiet. Over the course of the next seven months, the woman and two of the male employees who stood up for her rights were reportedly wrongfully terminated.

Amusement Party Company Sued for Racially Hostile Work Environment

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:52:03 -0800

In recent employment law news that our Long Beach Labor Attorneys have been following, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (EEOC) has filed a lawsuit against the family-owned amusement party company, Pinnacle Amusements, on behalf of black employees, who claimed to be subjected to a constant stream of racial harassment in the workplace.

According to the suit, over his six years of employment as a warehouse employee and driver, Benjamin Henderson as well as other black employees reportedly continually endured caustic racial harassment, reportedly leading to a hostile work environment. The EEOC stated that on a regular basis the employees were subjected to racial comments and slurs, such as the "n-word" in the workplace. Henderson reportedly complained about the constant harassment based on race, and the owner of the company dismissed his complaints, encouraging Henderson to be a "tough guy" and to "handle" the racial comments and that the racially derogatory comments were just "jokes." Henderson also complained about the discrimination to the company's co-owner, but with no relief from the racial harassment.

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, it is against the law for an employer to harass employees based on race. According to the EEOC, it is the responsibility of the employer to take action when an employee complains of harassment in the workplace. This lawsuit seeks punitive and compensatory damages, as well as injunctive relief for Henderson and the other African American employees who work for the company.

The EEOC claims that the owners subjected Henderson and the other employees to a hostile work environment where racial comments and slurs were disguised as "jokes" and the working employees were made to endure a constant stream of racial harassment in order to keep their jobs. According to Tina Burnside, supervisory trial attorney in the EEOC district office in Charlotte, NC, "Discrimination is never a joke--it is a violation of federal law."

California Court Overturns Female Firefighter's Racial, Gender Discrimination Case

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:12:39 -0800

As California Employment Lawyers, we have been following the recent news of a California appellate court reversal of the $6.2 million verdict against the city of Los Angeles--from the lawsuit filed by black lesbian firefighter Brenda Lee, who claimed discrimination, harassment, and wrongful termination in the workplace.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the 2nd District Court of Appeal made its decision today in Lee's case, where she sued the city of Los Angeles for alleged fire department discrimination. The lawsuit accused the fire department of discrimination based on gender, race, and sexual orientation and for failing to transfer her after she filed a harassment complaint.

Lee claimed in the lawsuit that her superiors put her through difficult fire department drills that neglected proper health and safety requirements, and subjected her to derogatory and inappropriate comments and actions.

The 2007 jury decision was reportedly the largest in a line of case settlements involving discrimination and retaliation against minorities and women within the fire department in Los Angeles. The cases have allegedly cost Los Angeles taxpayers more than $15 million since 2005.

LSU Professor and Hurricane Katrina Expert Files Retaliation and Wrongful Termination Lawsuit

Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:49:24 -0800

Our Anaheim, California-based attorneys at HOWARD | NASSIRI, PC have been reading about the recent wrongful termination lawsuit filed by Dr. Ivor van Heerden, recent deputy director of the Louisiana State University (LSU) Hurricane Center, where he is accusing LSU officials of retaliation, that led to his termination.

Dr. Igor van Heerden, a professor, disaster science specialist, author, and hurricane researcher, filed a whistleblower suit against the university and university officials last week, claiming that while he led the Louisiana team conducting a massive investigation into Hurricane Katrina, he suffered retaliation and harassment for years after making comments that criticized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' failure to keep the New Orleans safe.

After Hurricane Katrina, Dr. van Heerden spearheaded a major investigation examining the cause of the hurricane with the Louisiana State Forensic Data Gathering Team, called "Team Louisiana." Dr. van Heerden stated in his research that the levee design engineered by the Army Corps of Engineers proved to be a failure, and testified in front of Congress that this action was inexcusable, as the residents deserved to have proper levees that were secure. He also wrote many articles and published a best-selling book entitled "The Storm," where he attributed around 90 percent Katrina's flooding to the design failure of the levees.

According to the suit, University officials made attempts to quiet Dr. van Heerden from his public criticism and accused him of jeopardizing LSU's relationship with the Army Corps of Engineers and the federal government--risking LSU's posibilities for federal funding. Soon after the Team Louisiana report was released in April 2007, van Heerden requested as an expert witness on a lawsuit against the Army Corps of Engineers and the federal government. Van Heerden asked for permission to testify, and was later told that his employment would be terminated if he proceeded to testify against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Big Lots to Pay Big in California Harassment Case

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 12:25:31 -0800

In California employment news today, our attorneys at HOWARD | NASSIRI, PC have been following the announcement that Big Lots has settled a race harassment and discrimination lawsuit for $400,000, brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on behalf of at least five employees and group of unidentified class action members.

In the lawsuit, the EEOC accused Big Lots of subjecting a black maintenance mechanic as well as other black workers in the California distribution center to race discrimination and harassment--violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. According to the EEOC, the Hispanic supervisors and Big Lots co-workers harassed and discriminated against the black workers by consistently making derogatory comments, slurs and jokes based on race. The company allegedly did not take the necessary action to prevent harassment and discrimination in the workplace.

Along with the voluntary settlement of $400,000, Big Lots has also agreed to a two-year consent decree, to implement new policy, procedures, training, and court monitoring to protect employees from being subjected to workplace discrimination and harassment based on race in the future.

The EEOC reports that race-based charges have historically been one of the most frequent types of complaints in the offices throughout the nation. In fiscal year 2009, race-based discrimination accounted for nearly 36% of the EEOC's private sector caseload of 33,579 charges.

Anderson Cooper Sued By Interior Designer for Injury from Unsafe Workplace

Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:36:04 -0800

In a national employment lawsuit that our Southern California Employment Lawyers have been following, Anderson Cooper, the well known CNN new anchor is being sued by an interior designer after enduring a dangerous fall while working to design an old firehouse that Cooper is currently turning into his new home.

According to the New York Post, Killian O'Brien, the 29-year old interior designer in Brooklyn, fell 17 feet through a hole where the station's fire pole had been removed in September of last year. The hole was reportedly removed before Killian arrived, and was never covered up, reportedly causing an unsafe workplace environment that led to O'Brien's dramatic accident.

The lawsuit lists O'Brien's personal injuries as severe and permanent, and seeks unspecified damages. O'Brien is also suing residential real-estate developer Cary Tamarkin.

From 1906 to 2006, the firehouse in Manhattan was home to the Fire Patrol, a firefighting organization privately backed by the insurance industry. Cooper purchased the house from the New York Board of Fire Underwriters and reportedly plans to convert the station into a new home. Cooper hired Tamarkin who is known for performing modern residential restorations, and O'Brien, who has worked for many interior design companies as the redevelopment team.

California Labor Commissioner Enforces Labor Code 2810 in Landmark Janitorial Settlement

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 12:02:41 -0800

As California Employment and Labor Lawyers, we have been following the recent news of a landmark settlement that tested the 2004 addition to the California labor code, where a contractor will compensate subcontractors for depriving the workers of social security, unemployment insurance, and disability contributions.

Tidy Building Services, Inc., a New Orleans-based company, has agreed to pay $100,000 to the state of California to compensate employees who worked in janitorial services in Los Angeles and San Diego Counties, after reportedly not providing proper funding to subcontractors to ensure that employees received the full benefit of employment regulations and laws. As part of the settlement, over one hundred employees will receive anywhere between $100 and $2,000 each in compensation.

California Labor Commissioner Angela Bradstreet filed the complaint in 2008, and this is the first lawsuit where Labor Code section 2810 has been enforced--making it unlawful to subcontract janitorial or other services without providing enough funding to allow the subcontractor to comply with California laws and regulations. Employees who experience violations of this California labor code are entitled to receive damages.

In 2004, Labor Code section 2810 became law, in an effort to address specific problems low wage workers were experiencing in the employment areas of construction, janitorial services, security, farm labor, and garment industries--where violations of wage and hour laws are more prevalent, and exploitation of low wage workers is often due to language barrier and immigrant status.

California Solar Power Company Settles in Disability Discrimination Lawsuit

Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:55:58 -0800

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.

Agricultural Injuries and California Workers' Compensation Claims

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:46:59 -0800

According to a recent Industry Scorecard from the California Workers' Compensation Institute, that our labor attorneys at HOWARD | NASSIRI, PC have been following, agricultural claims cost the California workers' compensation system $1.46 billion in loss payments.

The scorecard provides data on claims experience among agricultural workers in California for an eight-year span of time, from accident year 2000 to 2008. The study found that agricultural workers accounted for 5.5 percent of all California job injury claims, and 5.9 percent of the workers' compensation benefit payments for the state.

The report also stated that these proportions have been growing, with recent losses of jobs in other employment sectors, and that agriculture claims have increased to up to 7.7 percent of accident year 2008.

The study found that the three most common agricultural worker injury categories are:

• Strains and sprains with back problems--medical issues that do not involve the spinal cord.
• Minor injuries and wounds to the skin
• Sprains of the shoulder, knee, arm, and lower leg.

Ten Year Hollywood Age Discrimination Lawsuit Ends--Writers Entitled to Settlement

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 09:24:54 -0800

A recent New York Times article, that our California Labor and Employment Attorneys have been following, discussed last month's $70 million settlement of a class-action age discrimination case brought by 165 television writers--who claim to have been discriminated against consistently by studios, agents, and producers because of their age.

The defendants in the lawsuit include the major broadcast television networks and the corresponding production studios affiliated with the networks, as well as several talent agencies--all of which the writers claim refused to represent their work, or their ability to be hired as writers because of their age. The $70 million settlement will reportedly be mostly paid by insurance carries, which reveals that neither the agency, studio, network or production company will be responsible for more than $1 million--less than it costs to produce one single episode of half-hour network television.

The article states that although $70 million sounds like a sizable settlement amount, roughly 40% of the age-discrimination settlement will go to lawyers' fees, as well as $2.5 million to create the Fund for the Future, a grant and loan fund writers. This leaves $43 million for the writing plaintiffs, of which nearly $245,000 will go to each of the named plaintiffs--although few will receive this much, as settlement payouts will depend on how many people apply for and are qualified to receive class action status.

Martin L. Levine, professor of Law and gerontology at UCLA claimed that $70 million is such a big number that it may attract a lot of attention for writers, as the threat of having to pay money might change the employment behavior. David R. Ginsburg, the executive director of the entertainment and media law program at UCLA's School of Law, counters that this settlement should be viewed through a narrow lens, as the defendants settled the case merely as a business matter, and never admitted any discriminatory acts.

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

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 10:26:36 -0800

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.

Young Workers in the Fast Food Industry at Risk--Sexual Harassment in McDonald's and Taco Bell

Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:46:20 -0800

In Monday's blog, our California Employment Attorneys discussed a recent episode of the news program 20/20, that reported on a number of teenage sexual harassment lawsuits pending against fast food restaurants such as McDonald's and Taco Bell--where high school students have reported sexual advances from their bosses or supervisors.

In one case against the fast food giant McDonald's, 16 year old employee Kasey Ramirez was reportedly approached by her supervisor, and taken into a back room, where she was touched inappropriately. Ramirez stated that she was scared that he would rape her, so she ran out and reported the sexual harassment to another shift supervisor. The supervisor reportedly told Ramirez not to be so upset, because everyone knew that this particular supervisor was a "pervert."

McDonald's stated that they have a strict policy prohibiting any type of harassment in their restaurants. After the incident with Ramirez in 2007, McDonald's claimed to have responded swiftly to the sexual harassment charge and proved to have taken the necessary actions to resolve the case.

In another sexual harassment case in Memphis, Tennessee, a Taco Bell manager pleaded guilty to raping two of his high school workers who were both 16. One of these workers became pregnant from the rape. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the first victim worked with the manager for nearly two months before she was raped. The second victim was attacked on her first day on the job. Although Taco Bell denied any wrongdoing, they agreed to pay the teens several thousand dollars, and signed on to train managers on how to appropriately deal with teenage employees.

California Hotel Pays $500,000 in Racial Discrimination and Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Settlements

Thu, 04 Feb 2010 12:09:11 -0800

In recent California employment law news, the San Gabriel Hilton, run by Landwin Management, Inc., has settled two lawsuits for national origin discrimination and sexual harassment for $500,000, and significant remedial relief.

According to the first suit, filed in 2007 by the U.S. Equal Employment Commission, (EEOC), Landwin Management, the company that runs the Hilton hotel in the middle of San Gabriel's Asian community, was accused of not rehiring Latino banquet servers after taking over the management of the Hilton hotel in 2005. The former servers claimed that because they were not Chinese, they were not hired back after the hotel turnover, and were replaced with Chinese employees who were less qualified.

In the second lawsuit, the EEOC claimed that the female workers in the Hilton endured a hostile work environment that was filled with verbal abuse by the supervisor of the housekeeping department, who reportedly referred to the women as prostitutes and whores. The female employees also claimed that the supervisor scolded the female workers if they talked to men. The lawsuit states that these harassment complaints were ignored by the management at Landwin.

Landwin Management will pay $500,000 to settle the two lawsuits, and will commit to a three-year consent decree that includes company policy changes, such as aiming to hire Hispanic workers, training employees in anti-discrimination, and hiring an EEOC consultant to monitor the progress of these goals.

EEOC Facts about Pregnancy Discrimination in the Workplace

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:59:37 -0800

In a blog from last week, our Anaheim-based Employment Attorneys discussed the topic of pregnancy discrimination--after the settlement of a case involving a female security guard who was allegedly subjected to unlawful pregnancy discrimination, termination and retaliation in the workplace.

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) was passed by Congress in 1978, as an amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to protect pregnant women in the workplace from any aspect of discrimination when it comes to hiring, firing, pay, equal opportunity for job assignments, promotions, layoffs, fringe benefits, health insurance, or any other term or condition of employment.

Under Federal law, pregnant women, or women who have conditions related to pregnancy must receive the same fair treatment as other employees. Discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, medical conditions related to pregnancy, or childbirth constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII.

According to the EEOC, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act:

• It is illegal for an employer to choose not to hire a woman who is pregnant due to her pregnancy or condition related to pregnancy, or based on any prejudice from co-workers, customers, or potential clients.

• An employer cannot determine the work capability of an employee based on conditions related to pregnancy. An employer does have rights, however, to request doctor's statements before giving sick leave, or sick benefits to an employee who is unable to work.

• Female employees who are unable to work temporarily due to pregnancy or conditions related to pregnancy must be treated in the same manner as other employees who are disabled temporarily.

• Employers must permit pregnant employees to do their job, for as long as the employees are capable of performing their job.

20/20 Reports on Teenage Sexual Harassment in the Workplace

Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:24:05 -0800

A recent episode of the television news program 20/20 covered the alarming number of teenage sexual harassment lawsuits pending against fast food restaurants in the state of California. This news story is also related to our last blog, discussing the epidemic of students in high school who are reporting sexual harassment from supervisors and bosses, as reported by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The program discussed specific cases that are pending, focusing on a suit that was filed against Starbucks, by a teenage female barista from Orange County, California who complained of sexual harassment and being taken advantage of sexually by her 24-year old store manager.

According to ABC News, months after she began working as a barista at Starbucks, 16-year old Kati Moore was approached by her adult supervisor with nearly daily demands for sexual intercourse. Moore claimed that she was embarrassed and felt like the manager had control over her job, so she agreed to the relationship. After Moore's family discovered the relationship, they pressed criminal charges against the Starbucks manager, Tim Horton, who claimed he was unaware that Moore was 16, and pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor--a felony charge that lead to a four month sentence in prison.

Moore's family is suing Starbucks for failing to protect Moore from sexual harassment and discrimination. Starbucks stated that it does have a strict policy against sexual harassment and managers dating baristas, but no specific policy about relationships with teenagers who are under the age of 18. Starbucks also stated that because the relationship was concealed from Starbucks, it was a direct violation of company policy. The coffee company is confident that this lawsuit will be resolved with Starbucks not being at fault.