In October 2019, Martin submitted a formal written complaint of harassment against Wullbrandt and Bradford.
When Martin made plans to return from medical leave, Bradford told the city clerk she would be placed on administrative leave.
While she participated in an interview with an outside investigator, Martin said city representatives never informed her of the results of the investigation.
“The City’s actions in placing Plaintiff on an involuntary leave of absence, failing to properly investigate her legitimate complaints of harassment and retaliation, and violations of the City Code and Brown Act, and firing Plaintiff on the fabricated and false basis of her position being non-essential were, taken together or individually, adverse employment actions as defined by the California Labor and Government Codes, and Regulations, the lawsuit stated. As a continuous course of conduct, these actions constituted a systematic pattern and practice of illegal retaliation.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
The regulatory framework that applies to California is complex and ever-changing. Even the most diligent employers can find themselves unintentionally out of compliance in ways both big and small. And California provides many avenues for employees to bring claims challenging that noncompliance, including administrative complaints, private individual or class action lawsuits, and actions under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA).
The following summarizes the most frequently missed requirements when employees are situated in the Golden State. Consulting with experienced California employment counsel is worth the relatively small investment when compared to the potential headaches and costs associated with compliance mistakes.
Trial Court Properly Dismissed
Employee s CFRA And Disability Discrimination Claims
Choochagi v. Barracuda Networks, Inc., 60 Cal. App.
5th 444 (2021)
George Choochagi worked as a technical support manager for
Barracuda Networks where he reported to Hossein Ghazizadeh.
Choochagi complained to HR that Ghazizadeh had made inappropriate
sexual comments to him about having sex with women at the office
and about Choochagi s not being man enough for his
position. Approximately 18 months after Choochagi transferred
to another supervisor, he began experiencing severe migraine
headaches and eye irritation, which required him to seek medical
treatment. When Choochagi requested additional leave time,
Barracuda allegedly moved to terminate his employment or force him
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
It’s never good news to hear that you have been sued, but lately the flood of COVID-related cases come with something extra – wage and hour claims. In essence, former employees who are retaining counsel for claimed wrongful termination (or similar) claims are commonly throwing in claims about missed meal or rest breaks and unpaid hours worked for good measure. Employers can learn from these cases to gain insights and tips for anticipating employee claims and preparing to avoid (or mitigate) them.
Case Studies and Summaries
While there are many COVID-19 cases pending in California, two cases from Sacramento County and Orange County provide good case studies for this tacking-on trend.
Wednesday, March 10, 2021
California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), the agency charged with administering California’s employment discrimination statute and regulations, has updated its COVID-19 guidance for employers. The updates cover many issues that employers had been struggling with during the pandemic, including:
COVID-19 Inquiries and Protective Equipment
Employees with COVID-19 Symptoms or Infection
Job-Protected Leave
Vaccination
COVID-19 Inquiries
The DFEH states that employers may ask employees if they are experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, which is also required under many of California’s local health orders. Employers can also ask an employee why they did not report to work if they suspect the absence was for a medical reason. However, employers must keep confidential any illness or medically related information disclosed by the employee. The guidance provides that employers may also take an employee’s temperature or requir