What do you think of when you think about St. Patrick’s Day? Corn Beef, Cabbage, Green Beer, John Wayne’s greatest movie “The Quiet Man”, new governmental regulations for bars and restaurants? WHAT!?!
By: Scott M. Plamondon The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) thinks so. The EEOC recently posted a letter to its website stating that it may be unlawful for employers to require a job applicant to have obtained a high school diploma if the applicant suffers from a learning disability and has been unable to obtain one. The… Continue Reading
By: Lizbeth V. West, Esq. Most employers are aware of the federal law known as the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (“USERRA”) which is designed to protect those who serve in the armed forces from discrimination and retaliation. However, many California employers are unaware that section 394 of the California Military and… Continue Reading
By: Chuck Post Over the last year, Weintraub Genshlea Chediak Tobin & Tobin has tripled the size of its employment law department. In addition to enhancing the services we can provide to our clients, this growth has allowed us to continue presenting our quality seminars and maintaining our Labor and Employment Law Blog. Our results… Continue Reading
By: Susan E. Kirkgaard Employment claims of discrimination based upon national origin have risen over 65% since 1997, according to the EEOC. This statistic becomes even more striking when one considers that discrimination claims in general rose only 20% in the past ten years. Recent EEOC decisions present the ongoing trap for the unwary – if an… Continue Reading
Big news! Weintraub’s L&E Law Blog is one of the nominated candidates for the LexisNexis Top 25 Labor and Employment Law Blogs of 2011. We need your help! Click here, log onto the Labor and Employment Law Community and then leave a comment at the bottom of the page saying “I vote for The Labor &… Continue Reading
Today, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Wal-Mart in its monumental sex discrimination lawsuit brought on behalf of all female employees. The court ruled unanimously that the lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. cannot proceed as a class action, reversing a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The… Continue Reading
According to recent media reports, California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman released employment records to refute allegations that she knowingly hired an illegal immigrant as a nanny and housekeeper in 2000. These documents, which The Sacramento Bee posted at http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/Diaz%20Forms.pdf, provide a good illustration as to why California employers should use caution before adopting employment applications,… Continue Reading
I was recently asked something of a “desert island” question. Instead of being asked what 10 records or 10 movies I would take to a desert island, I was asked, “If an employer could only do one thing to reduce its exposure to employment discrimination liability, what should it do?” Shooting from the hip, I said, “Whenever… Continue Reading
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) takes effect November 21, 2009. Among other things, GINA requires that employers post a notice informing employees that the employer does not discriminate on the basis of genetic information.
In Johnson v. United Cerebral Palsy/Spastic Children’s Foundation of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, a California Court of Appeal has held that an employee can prove a case of discrimination by putting on evidence from other employees that claim that they too were subject to discrimination by the employer (“me too” evidence).
The California Supreme Court has finally settled the troubling issue of whether intentional discrimination must be shown to prove a disability access claim under the California Unruh Act. In Munson v. Del Taco, Inc., the Court decided the issue after it was certified to the California Supreme Court from the U.S. Court of Appeal for the… Continue Reading
The United States Supreme Court has issued its ruling in the Ricci, et. al. v. Destefano, et. al. case (referred to by the press as the “reverse” discrimination case that U.S. Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, decided with other Court of Appeal justices). Essentially the case stands for the rule that an employer may not manipulate… Continue Reading
In the recent case of Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., the United States Supreme Court held that a plaintiff must prove that his/her age was the “but for” cause of the adverse employment action they claim was discriminatory (e.g. demotion). Plaintiff was 54 years old when his employer reassigned him from his position as a… Continue Reading
In his first significant act as President in the labor and employment arena, President Obama effectively overturned the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. by signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (“Ledbetter Act”) into law this Thursday. The main thrust of the Ledbetter Act is that it… Continue Reading
In 2002, Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee (Metro), began looking into rumors of sexual harassment by one of its employees, Gene Hughes. A member of Metro’s human resources department asked plaintiff Vicky Crawford (a 30-year Metro employee) whether she had witnessed any of Hughes’ “inappropriate behavior.” Crawford, who was not the subject… Continue Reading
In Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, an employer used a "matrix" method to carry out a reduction in force. The employer’s method ranked its employees based on objective factors (i.e. performance and years of service) and subjective factors (i.e. flexibility and criticality). The employer then conducted a disparate impact analysis for the lowest scoring… Continue Reading
In Sprint v. Mendelsohn, the U.S. Supreme Court held that admission of "me too" evidence in discrimination cases is fact based and "depends on many factors…." Plaintiff, who was 51 years old and the oldest employee in her department, was laid off during a company-wide reduction in force. She subsequently sued Sprint for disparate treatment… Continue Reading
In Hicks v. KNTV Television, Inc., plaintiff, a white male, worked as a news anchor for defendant-employer. Plaintiff’s contract was not renewed when it expired. Instead, defendant hired a black male to replace plaintiff. Plaintiff filed suit for discrimination, alleging that the employer did not renew his contract because it was being pressured to hire… Continue Reading
Two African-American employees were denied promotions in the defendant’s food processing plant that were ultimately awarded to two Caucasians. Among the proof of discrimination they offered was the fact that their supervisor used the term “boy” in referring to them. The Court of Appeals held that this term was insufficient to show racial bias. Held:… Continue Reading