Rancho Santiago Community College District Found Liable for Failing to Accommodate Disabled Employee

Plaintiff Maria Hernandez worked for Rancho Santiago Community College District on and off for several years without having any performance issues.  In 2013, the district hired her as an administrative assistant.  Per the district’s protocol, Ms. Hernandez was put on probation for one year.  The district would evaluate her performance at three months, seven months and eleven months.  At the successful completion of the probationary period, Ms. Hernandez would then become a permanent employee.

Eight months into her probationary period, Ms. Hernandez went out on district-approved temporary disability leave to have surgery.  The district had not evaluated her performance at three and seven months.  She was scheduled to return shortly after the one year anniversary of her hiring date.

Rancho Santiago Community College District terminated Ms. Hernandez while she was out of disability leave. She sued the district alleging that it has violated the California Fair Employment and Housing Act by failing to reasonably accommodate her and failing to engage in the interactive process.  (more…)

National Lawyers Guild Presents Hunter Pyle with the Champion of Justice Award

On April 14, 2018, the National Lawyers Guild San Francisco Bay Area Chapter presented Hunter Pyle with the Champion of Justice Award at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts.  Hunter was recognized for dedicating his career to fighting for economic justice as an employment attorney, championing the causes of workers’ rights, and contributing to the progressive legal community.  Hunter was also praised for spreading his passion and knowledge of workers’ rights by teaching employment law at Berkeley Law and mentoring inexperienced attorneys.  Hunter expressed thanks not only to his family for supporting him, but to his clients who have the courage to stand up for justice and advocate on behalf of all workers.

Plaintiff Denied Attorneys’ Fees even though his Physical Disability was a Substantial Motivating Reason Behind his Termination

William Bustos brought several disability discrimination-related claims against his employer Global P.E.T., Inc.  Mr. Bustos was fired just a day before he was scheduled to have carpal tunnel surgery.  The case went to trial and resulted in a defense verdict.  Despite the defense verdict, the jury found that Mr. Bustos’s disability was a substantial motivating reason for Global P.E.T., Inc.’s decision to terminate him.  However, the jury also found that Global P.E.T., Inc.’s conduct was not a substantial factor in causing harm to Mr. Bustos.   Bustos v. Global P.E.T., Inc., et al., Fourth Appellate Court of Appeal, No. E065869 (published Jan. 16, 2018). (more…)

Employee Cannot Pursue PAGA Claim Against Employer after Settling and Dismissing Individual Labor Code Causes of Action

On December 29, 2017, the California Court of Appeal Second Appellate District held that an employee who settled and dismissed his individual wage and hour claims against his former employer no longer had standing to maintain a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) cause of action against that same employer.  Kim v. Reins International California, Inc., 2d. Dist. Case No. B278642 (filed December 29, 2017).  (more…)

An Employer Can Potentially be Held Liable if a Nonemployee Sexually Harasses an Employee

What happens if a nonemployee harasses or sexually assaults an employee in the workplace?  Is the employer liable?  Possibly.  On October 26, 2017, the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District considered whether an employee’s claims against her employer for violating the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) for harassment and failing to prevent harassment overcame the workers’ compensation exclusivity doctrine.  M.F. v. Pacific Pearl Hotel Management, LLC (D070150, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, 10/26/17).  (more…)

New California Law Prohibits Employers from Asking Job Applicants about Salary History

On October 12, 2017, Assembly Bill 168, which prohibits employers from asking job applicants for salary history information, was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown. Governor Brown vetoed a similar bill in 2015 on the grounds that it would prevent employers “from obtaining relevant information with little evidence that this would assure more equitable wages.” This time around, the bill enjoyed the support of both parties and the governor. (more…)

California Court Rules that One Year Statute of Limitations to File DFEH Complaint Runs from Last Day of Employment

If an employee is being harassed or discriminated against in the workplace, he has one year to file a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH).  Employees and employers alike sometimes question when the one year statute of limitations starts to run.  On August 29, 2017, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District held that an employee has one year from his last day of employment to timely file a complaint with the DFEH.  Aviles-Rodriguez v. Los Angeles Community College District, No. B278863, 2017 WL 3712199 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2017).    (more…)

Ninth Circuit Issues Decision Regarding Employee’s Retaliation Claim Against Employer’s Attorney

In Arias v. Raimondo, Plaintiff Jose Anrulfo Arias filed suit against his employer’s attorney, Anthony Raimondo, for retaliation after Raimondo tried to have Arias taken into custody by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) during a deposition. Arias v. Raimondo, No. 15-16120 (June 22, 2017).  Raimondo was representing Angelo Dairy in a lawsuit that Arias had filed in 2006 alleging various wage and hour violations.  In an attempt to derail this lawsuit, Raimondo provided ICE with information helpful in determining Arias’ legal status in the United States, and offered to “make the necessary arrangements” to assist ICE in apprehending Arias just ten weeks before trial.  When Arias discovered what Raimondo had done, he settled his wage and hour claims out of fear that he might be deported.  Then, Arias filed suit against Raimondo for retaliation in violation of the the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) under the theory that Raimondo was acting as Angelo Dairy’s agent when he retaliated against Arias. (more…)

The Ninth Circuit Examines Whether Prior Salary Can Justify Wage Discrepancies Under the Equal Pay Act

The Equal Pay Act prohibits employers from paying men and women differently for equal work.  However, is it unlawful for an employer to have a policy that offers its new hires a salary that is five percent higher than their previous salary if the policy results in a female worker getting paid less than all her male colleagues?

In a 1982 decision, Kouba v. Allstate Insurance, the Ninth Circuit held that an employer can take prior salary into account when deciding an employee’s pay rate if the prior salary effectuated a business policy and was reasonable.  691 F.2d 873 (9th Cir. 1982).  In a decision last month, the Ninth Circuit provided further guidance on the extent to which employers can rely on prior salary in determining its employees’ pay.  Rizo v. Yovino, No. 16-15372 (April 27, 2017).  (more…)

Ninth Circuit Finds in Favor of Plaintiff’s Age Discrimination and Retaliation Claims

Gilberto Santillan will have another opportunity to demonstrate that his employer of 32 years, USA Waste of California, Inc., wrongfully terminated him on the basis of his age and retaliated against him.  On April 7, 2017, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal held that Mr. Santillan established a prima facie case under his claims for age discrimination and retaliation in Santillan v. USA Waste of California, Inc.  (No. 15-55238, 2017 WL 1289971 (9th Cir. Apr. 7, 2017)).  The Court further held that USA Waste failed to provide any evidence that it had a legitimate reason for firing him. (more…)