Training new employees is expensive. That is particularly true when an employer offers to pay for an employee’s educational training. The benefits of doing so include a more educated and well-trained workforce, as well as increased morale and employee loyalty. The risk, of course, is that an employee may decide to take his or her
California’s New Equal Pay Laws Promise to Bring More Litigation
Equal pay claims just got a lot
tougher to defend in California. Last month, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 358, a new law which aims to curb a statewide pay disparity between men and women. The law, dubbed the California Fair Pay Act, goes into effect on January 1, 2016 and requires immediate, affirmative assessment by most California employers.
Overview of the California Fair Pay Act.
Current law already requires California employers to pay men and women the same wage for performing equal work in the same establishment. The new law broadens that requirement. It removes the term “equal work” and replaces it with “substantially similar work.” This means work that is substantially similar when viewed as “a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility, and performed under similar working conditions.” The new law also removes the “same establishment” requirement, meaning that employees can now bring equal pay claims by showing the employer paid an opposite sex employee at a different location higher wages for substantially similar work.
Continue Reading California’s New Equal Pay Laws Promise to Bring More Litigation
Ninth Circuit Says Employee Who Made Death Threats Against His Co-Workers Could Not Sue His Employer For Disability Discrimination
Joining similar holdings from several other circuits, the Ninth Circuit recently held in Mayo v. PCC Structurals, Inc. that a depressed employee who threatened to kill his co-workers and was thereafter fired was not a qualified individual under the ADA. The court therefore affirmed the district court’s summary judgment on the employee’s disability discrimination claim.
Stress, Depression, and Bullying Lead Employee to Threaten Co-Workers’ Lives
The plaintiff, Timothy Mayo, welded aircraft parts for PCC Structurals. In 1999, Mayo was diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD). Despite the diagnosis, he continued working without incident for years. In 2010, that changed. Mayo and some other co-workers felt they were being bullied by their supervisor. Following a co-worker’s complaint and a subsequent meeting to discuss the bullying, Mayo told three different co-workers that he wanted to kill the supervisor. He told one co-worker that he felt like bringing a shotgun to work and “blowing off” the supervisor and others’ heads. He told another co-worker that he wanted to “bring a gun down and start shooting people,” explaining that 1:30 p.m. was an optimal time because all of the supervisors would be present. Pretty scary stuff.
Mayo’s co-workers reported the threats and HR reached out to him. He told an HR representative that he “couldn’t guarantee” he wouldn’t carry out the threats. PCC suspended him and called the police, who in turn took Mayo into custody for six days on the basis that he was a threat to himself and others. After his release, Mayo spent two months on FMLA leave. His doctor thereafter cleared him to return to work but suggested that he be assigned a different supervisor. Instead, PCC fired him.Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Says Employee Who Made Death Threats Against His Co-Workers Could Not Sue His Employer For Disability Discrimination