201509.17
0
0

Employee’s Inability to work for Supervisor is not a “Disability”

In Higgins-Williams v. Sutter Med. Found, 237 Cal.App.4th 78 (2015), the court held that “an employee’s inability to work under a particular supervisor because of anxiety and stress related to the supervisor’s standard oversight of the employee’s job performance does not constitute a mental disability under FEHA.” This could have very possibly been a different…

201507.27
0
0

CA SUPREME COURT LEVELS THE PLAYING FIELD

California courts hold that an unsuccessful plaintiff that files a lawsuit under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) is only liable for the prevailing defendant’s attorneys’ fees if the Court finds that the case was frivolous. However, what about costs?   Litigation costs can be substantial and may be a factor in deciding whether or…

201506.18
0
0

Labor Commissioner Holds Uber Drivers are “Employees” not “Contractors”

A California Labor Commissioner recently held that Uber drivers are “Employees” and not “Contractors”.  In reaching its decision, the Labor Commissioner reasoned that Uber controls the tools driver use, monitors their approval ratings and terminates their access to the system if their ratings fall below 4.6 stars.  This decision could have a massive chilling effect…

201506.09
0
0

Employees Can Discuss Their Wages!

California Labor Code Section 232 provides that: No employer may do any of the following: (a) Require, as a condition of employment, that an employee refrain from disclosing the amount of his or her wages. (b) Require an employee to sign a waiver or other document that purports to deny the employee the right to disclose the…

201506.09
0
0

Injunctions Against Employees that Steal from Employers

One of my business clients recently had a disgruntled employee that took confidential data/information from my client and then demanded that my client pay money under the threat of disclosing the confidential data/information. I immediately filed suit against the disgruntled employee and within 1 week obtained an injunction requiring the now former employee to return…

201505.06
0
0

Hey new Mommies – Know Your Rights!

In addition to guaranteed leave for pregnant employees, California law requires employers with 5 or more employees to reasonably accommodate an employee’s pregnancy and related medical conditions to the same extent as it would accommodate other disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 12945(b)(1).)

201504.30
0
0

“NO RE-HIRE” CLAUSES UNDER FIRE

“No Re-Hire” clauses are common in settlement agreements involving employment law related claims. In Golden v. California Emergency Physicians Medical Group, the Ninth Circuit held that a “no re-hire” provision in a settlement agreement could, under certain circumstances, could constitute an unlawful restraint of trade under California law. In Golden, a physician verbally agreed to…