Close

Bay Area Employment Lawyer Blog

Updated:

The Perils of Refusing to Sign for Receipt of a Disciplinary Notice are Underscored in this Unemployment Insurance Appeal

What can I say about this case except it should be a lesson to employees to sign for the receipt of a disciplinary action when required to do so by your employer, or face the wrath of a disingenuous and biased court of appeals like Mr. Medeiros did in Paratransit,…

Updated:

Even Though Employers Have A Significant Advantage Over Employees in Selecting A Forum – Such as Arbitration – Employer who Hides the Ball Unfairly Takes Advantage of Its Position

Alright – enough already! The courts really give employers every unfair opportunity to require their employees to “agree” to arbitrate their disputes. But even the courts agree that employers can’t be allowed to hide what they are doing! Take Empire Today LLC (also known as Flooring Install). Their management should…

Updated:

Employee Walks Through an Issue Preclusion Thicket by Bringing Claims in Multiple Forums Including Arbitration, Grievance and Mandamus as Well as Multiple Lawsuits

I understand the desire of an employee (or employee’s attorney) to exhaust all avenues to contest the wrongful discriminatory and/or retaliatory termination of an employee, but White v. City of Pasadena __F.3d___ (9th Cir Jan 17, 2012) is a prime example of why such a shotgun approach can be shortsighted…

Updated:

Doctor/Medical Group Partner Who Complains About Sexual Harassment of Employees is Protected Against Retaliation

Protection from retaliation when an employee complains about or blows the whistle on sexual harassment, or other discriminatory conduct, is an important right for California employees. This right is found in the Fair Employment and Housing Act § 12940 (h). Dr. Fitzsimons found out just how important this right was…

Updated:

California Supreme Court Places Responsibility for Sexual Harassment Squarely with School District That Knew or Should Have Known That Its Employee Would Sexually Harass a Student

Although this is not an employment case, C.A. v. William S. Hart Union High School District, 53 Cal.4th 861 (March 8, 2012) is a sexual harassment case, and as such, important to employees, employers and employment lawyers. School districts, like employers, have – under some circumstances – avoided legal responsibility…

Updated:

California Supreme Court’s Grant of Review of Class Action Ruling on the Use of Statistical Evidence Could be Good News for Class Action Plaintiffs

On May 16, 2012, the California Supreme Court granted review of Duran v. U.S. National Bank (USB) (2012) 203 Cal. App 4th 212. In that case, a class of bank employees won an award of $15 million for unpaid overtime. The award was based on a variety of evidence which…

Updated:

In Long Awaited Brinker Decision, California Supreme Court Affirms Employers’ Duty to Provide a Thirty-Minute, Uninterrupted Meal Period

The California Supreme Court has laid clear, after much confusion, the proper standard by which employers must provide their employees with meal periods, imposing an affirmative burden to completely relieve their employees from duty so that the employees may take full, thirty-minute, uninterrupted meal periods. If the employer fails to…

Updated:

Court Holds that Attendance is an Essential Function of the Job for a Neonatal Nurse, Making the Law of Reasonable Accommodation Unnecessarily Unreasonable

Perhaps this case is an example of bad facts make bad law, or perhaps this panel was just kinda testy about the importance of attendance at work. Ms. Samper was a nurse who worked in the neo-natal intensive care unit of defendant Providence St. Vincent Medical Center. Due to an…

Updated:

NLRB Rules That Employer Cannot Simply Claim That an Employee is Not Authorized to Work Under Immigration Laws to Engage in a Fishing Expedition Regarding an Employee’s Immigration Status

Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002) created some bad law when it held that the NLRB cannot award a backpay remedy to an employee who was not legally authorized to work in the United States. Since then employers have had a field day in cases where…

Updated:

U.S. Supreme Court Comes Down on Side of Religious Organizations’ Right to Discriminate

It isn’t a great surprise that, when this U.S. Supreme Court jumped into the fray of cases determining when and under what circumstances a religious organization can discriminate against its employees, it favored the religious organization over the employee. In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC, 565 U.S.…

Contact Us