We Help Protect
California's Employees

SAN FRANCISCO EMPLOYMENT LAW BLOG

California protects employees who serve as volunteer emergency responders and are called into action during natural disasters.

California law makes it unlawful for an employer to fire or otherwise discriminate against employees who take a temporary leave of absence to respond to an emergency in their roles as volunteer firefighters, emergency rescue personnel, or reserve peace officers.

Generally, the law does not require advance notice, except for certain health care workers. Employees who are health care providers must inform their employers both when they become designated as emergency rescue personnel and when they are notified of their duty in an emergency.

When a person faces harassment on the job, it can be difficult to know where to turn for help. In particular, sexual harassment can be a struggle to face head-on, even in the wake of the #MeToo movement. While many California employees are advised to go to their human resources department to file complaints regarding such harassment, not every company has an HR department.

Fortunately, individuals in this type of situation do not have to feel as if their hands are tied. They can first attempt to talk to the harasser in hopes of getting the undesired actions to stop. By making it clear that the actions are unwanted and unacceptable, a harasser may stop the unwanted behavior. Of course, if a person feels that confronting the harasser would put the person in danger, it may be best to first file a complaint with a manager.

Whether the situation is discussed with a harasser first or not, if the actions continue, the employee may want to go to the highest-ranking person in the company. This person should investigate the situation. If a worker faces a situation where no internal action is taken against the harassment despite filing complaints, the person may wish to contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Even without a human resources department, sexual harassment victims still have options for making their complaints known. Of course, addressing the misconduct is not always easy. Fortunately, California workers in this type of situation do not have to face their cases alone, and consulting with knowledgeable attorneys may help them understand their legal options.

Former Walmart store associates Leigha Klopp and Kaitlyn Hoover last week filed a class-action lawsuit in state Supreme Court claiming the Arkansas-based company’s absentee policy penalized them after they had to take time off for unscheduled pregnancy-related hospital visits, and violated their rights under state law.

Their suit joins a growing chorus of similar complaints nationwide, claiming that America’s largest retailer and numerous other large companies systematically punish pregnant employees with discriminatory policies and practices.

Walmart’s policy in particular “flouts New York’s pregnancy accommodation law by punishing pregnant workers for lawful absences,” said Dina Baskt, co-president and co-founder of worker advocacy group A Better Balance, which filed the suit July 24 on behalf of Klopp, Hoover and any other pregnant woman affected by what the suit claims is Walmart’s policy in New York state. “No pregnant worker, many fearing miscarriage, should be fired for seeking emergency medical care,” she added.

At issue in the suit is New York’s Pregnant Worker Fairness act, enacted in 2016, which requires employers to make “reasonable accommodations” for medical needs related to pregnancy unless such accommodations would create “undue hardship” on the employer. Those accommodations include providing limited time off or an altered schedule for medical visits.

This suit is the first class-action suit brought under the new law.

Baskt called on the company to “immediately change its policies to comply with this law and ensure that no pregnant worker is forced to choose between a healthy pregnancy and a pink slip.”

In an emailed statement on Thursday, Walmart spokesman Randy Hargrove disputed that company policies codify discrimination but said the company would look into the women’s claims.

“We take these issues seriously and do not tolerate discrimination,” he said. “Like any company, we have an attendance policy that helps ensure we are taking care of our customers. We understand associates may have to miss work on occasion and we have processes in place to assist them. This includes legally protected and authorized absences, such as medical-related accommodation, FMLA leave, pregnancy and bereavement that are not counted against our attendance policy.”

Leigha’s story

A 2015 graduate of Albion High School, Leigha Klopp landed a job at Walmart in October 2016, making $9.75 per hour. She worked in the apparel department, typically folding and organizing clothing during her shifts and filling in at other departments on an as-needed basis.

According to the lawsuit, Walmart’s disciplinary policy at the time was that employees would accumulate so-called “points” each time they missed a scheduled shift, arrived late or left early without advance approval from a supervisor. Under the scheme, hourly employees like Klopp and Hoover would get one point for each full shift missed, and a half-point for each incomplete shift or tardiness.

If an employee accumulated four points during their first six months of employment, they could be fired. After probation, employees who accumulated nine points during any rolling six-month period were at risk of being fired, according to the court documents.

Although Klopp and fiancé Jakob Kenward hadn’t been trying, it was a happy surprise when they learned she was pregnant in late December 2016.

“It was scary because it wasn’t planned, but we were making the best of the situation,” she said.

On a Friday afternoon in mid-January 2017, while organizing her store’s shoe department, Klopp was suddenly overcome by dizziness and started having cramps.

“It got to the point where I couldn’t stand, I couldn’t physically work, I was in tears,” said Klopp. “I was terrified. I was scared something was wrong, and my first instinct was that I had to go to the hospital.”

A coworker summoned her supervisor.

“I told the supervisor I was pregnant and having a lot of pain and cramps and I’m worried that I’m miscarrying,” she said.

The manager told her to go, but said she’d be docked a half-point for leaving early.

She went to an area hospital, where doctors provided her intravenous fluids and anti-nausea medications and gave her a note putting her out of work for the next three days.

When she returned to work, according to the suit, managers refused to accept it and gave her a half-point for leaving early on Friday.

A few weeks later, Klopp said, she awoke nauseated, thinking she’d only throw up, and then go in to work.

“But when I vomited it was bloody, so I immediately called my OB/GYN and she said you have to go to the hospital,” said Klopp. “I said, but I have to work or I’ll get fired. And she said, ‘It’s not a question.’ ”

In her lawsuit, Klopp said when she called the Walmart store that morning to report that she was going to take her doctor’s advice, the manager told her if she didn’t make her shift that day, she’d have “too many points” and would be terminated.

With a doctor’s note in hand to excuse her absence, Klopp returned to Walmart a few days later for her next scheduled shift. But, she said, the bosses refused to take the document, walked her to the main office and fired her.

“They asked me to hand in my vest and my badge and to clean out my locker,” she said. “It felt very unfair that I was being punished for something that wasn’t in my control and that the employers just didn’t care about me as a person, or my family or what I was going through.”

According to the suit, if company officials had excused Klopp’s pregnancy-related illnesses, she would not have been fired.

Reasonable accommodations

Circumstances were similar for Kaitlyn Hoover, who was fired in March 2017 after severe nausea, vomiting and dehydration in the early weeks of her pregnancy resulted in her missing work due to a brief hospitalization, according to the lawsuit.

When Hoover returned to her store for her next scheduled shift, she too was told her absence was not excusable, that the company doesn’t accept doctor’s notes and was summarily fired.

“I was devastated when Walmart fired me. I had a baby coming and all of a sudden I couldn’t pay my bills,” said Hoover in a written statement. “I am bringing this lawsuit because what happened to me was wrong and I want to make sure that Walmart is held accountable so that other pregnant women won’t be treated like I was.”

New York’s pregnant worker protection act requires employers to make “reasonable accommodations” for medical needs related to pregnancy, unless it would create an undue hardship or if the employee cannot, with accommodation, perform the activities of her job in a reasonable manner. The law says an employer may request a health care provider’s note to verify the existence of the pregnancy-related condition.

Examples of reasonable accommodations include: bathroom, food or drink breaks; allowing an employee to carry a water bottle; dress code flexibility; limits on lifting requirements; transfer to a less-strenuous shift, position or work location; limited time off or altered schedule for medical visits; and a reduced schedule.

The women’s lawsuit alleges that when Walmart employees phone in to report an absence, “they are consistently told that absences for pregnancy-related conditions cannot be authorized and that they will incur points if they cannot appear for their scheduled shift.”

They claim their managers never considered whether they should make accommodations for them even though time off to seek medical attention or recover from pregnancy-related conditions is “explicitly contemplated as a reasonable accommodation under the PWFA,” according to the suit.

In October 2017, Walmart revised its policies to allow employees who are pregnant, breastfeeding or recovering from childbirth to ask for job adjustments, reasonable accommodations or a temporary transfer to a different position.

Walmart has 30 days to respond to the suit filed by Klopp and Hoover.

Not just Walmart

Across the country, Walmart is facing similar lawsuits and other legal actions. A federal judge recently denied the company’s bid to dismiss a different class action suit filed that alleges the company refused to accommodate medically-imposed lifting restrictions for two pregnant employees in Illinois and Florida.

And Walmart is not alone. Other major businesses under fire for alleged pregnancy discrimination include pharmaceutical companies Merk & Co., Novartis, AT&T, Whole Foods, 21st Century Fox, and the auditing firm KPMG.

In June, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo even directed the state Division of Human Rights to investigate past and present claims made against Walmart, Merck, Novartis and commodity traders Glencore.

“New York leads the nation in advancing equal rights, and these actions will build on our proud record to help ensure women have equal opportunities to succeed in the workplace,” he said in a press release announcing the move. “Discrimination against those who are pregnant is illegal, and we will hold employers who violate the law fully accountable.”

Source, https://leclerclecldev.wpengine.com/wp-contentchicago.suntimes.com/working/walmart-employees-leigha-klopp-kaitlyn-hoover-allege-pregnancy-discrimination, Chicago Sun Times, July 30, 2018.

While most California residents undoubtedly want to feel joyous anticipation when they find out they are expecting a child, they may also have less happy feelings. In particular, working women may worry that their employers will treat them unfairly due to their conditions. While pregnancy issues often do not prevent women from working entirely, some employers do not feel the need to provide the necessary accommodations.

It was recently reported that multiple legal claims have been made in another state against Walmart. Two women indicated that they were fired from their jobs after they took time off of work to attend to pregnancy-related medical conditions. Walmart issued a statement in response to the claims which stated that they do not condone discrimination and deny the claims made against the company.

Unfortunately, pregnancy discrimination is a rampant issue in many companies. Reports indicated that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission received over 3,000 pregnancy-related discrimination claims last year. While this is a real issue, proving these claims in court can be difficult without supporting evidence. Still, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act specifically works to protect pregnant individuals from unfair treatment.

Individuals who believe that they have been the victims of this type of mistreatment may want to determine what type of information could help support their claims. California workers may want to consult with legal professionals who can evaluate their cases and determine their best courses of action. Facing discrimination for pregnancy issues should not be tolerated, and parties may want to understand that they do have rights and options for addressing such wrongdoing.

Being treated unfairly can often leave a person feeling stung. In serious cases, such as workplace discrimination, the reactions may be much more severe, and understandably so. When workers in California and elsewhere are mistreated on the job due to their race, religion, gender or other protected status, they may experience a myriad of emotions and wonder what their best courses of action may be.

It was recently reported that a discrimination lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against a company in another state. Reports indicated that an African-American man filed a complaint due to being discriminated against on the job. He has worked with the company since 2012 and stated that he was called a racial slur on his first day. He also claims that he was not given a promotion due to complaining about discriminatory actions.

The man believes that he was mistreated, retaliated against and harassed due to his skin color. He hopes to receive compensation for various damages, including emotional pain, loss of enjoyment of life, inconvenience and others. A representative for the company denied any wrongdoing and did not provide any additional comment on the pending lawsuit.

Workplace discrimination can limit employees’ advancement opportunities and also damage their personal well-being. If California workers believe that they have been unfairly treated on the job to a serious degree, they may wish to look into their legal options. Speaking with experienced attorneys could allow them to obtain evaluations of their cases in hopes of determining their best courses of action.

Most people face some type of behavior in the workplace that makes then feel uncomfortable. Unfortunately, some of those actions may be more serious than others, such as sexual harassment. While this misconduct takes place often, many California residents may wonder why it happens in the workplace.

Many individuals think that employers and other parties in management-type positions harass workers as a way to show their power over subordinates. However, one study indicates that individuals in positions of power may carry out sexual harassment because they feel insecure. Research apparently showed that many individuals in positions of leadership had fears of facing criticism for carrying out their duties ineffectively and reportedly harassed workers as a means of keeping their positions of power.

This type of harassment also does not simply apply men holding the highest positions. Individuals who hold shift management roles may also attempt to intimidate their subordinates. This means that if places of employment want to prevent this type of harassment in the workplace, they may want to focus their training and prevention efforts on workers at all levels and not just those in higher positions.

No matter the excuses behind sexual harassment, it is still misconduct that should not take place. If California workers have had to suffer through such actions while on the job, they may want to find out how to effectively handle complaints. If filing a complaint within the company does not have the desired results, taking additional legal action may be within the rights of harassment victims.

Workers have the right to earn a fair wage. Laws are put in place to govern hourly wages for workers in order to prevent individuals from unfair compensation. Unfortunately, not all employers abide by these laws, and some workers may suffer due to not receiving the pay needed to provide for themselves and their families.

It was recently reported that a company in California was fined for wage theft violations. The situation involved a contractor who utilized hundreds of workers on 26 construction projects. As part of the violations, the workers were give one 30-minute meal break, but they were not given other rest breaks. Additionally, some workers were not paid overtime, and other did not receive minimum wage. Rather than paying hourly rates, the company would provide some workers with flat rates, which often did not cover all hours or overtime pay.

As a result, the Labor Commissioner’s Office has required the company to pay $1.9 million in fines. Approximately $1.8 million of that amount will go toward the 472 workers who were not properly compensated, and $72,400 would go toward civil penalties. The violations occurred from Aug. 2014 to July 2016.

Unfair compensation should not be tolerated in the workplace. Of course, many California workers may not realized that they have been the victims of wage theft or fear that they may lose their jobs if they complain. Luckily, individuals in this type of situation can enlist legal advocates to help them understand their cases and determine the best courses of action to address the issues.

Home Depot is offering an employee in Albany, New York, his job back after the company recently fired him for speaking up to a customer who hurled racist insults at him.

Maurice Rucker, who is black, was working in the garden center when he asked a customer with a dog to leash his pet while in the store, the Albany Times Union reported on Thursday.

In response, the customer, who is white, reportedly cursed at Rucker and said, “You’re from the ghetto. What do you know?”

Rucker, 60, told the Times Union that the customer said he would not have a job if Donald Trump wasn’t the president and called former President Barack Obama a “Muslim who didn’t know what he was doing.”

Rucker, who has worked at Home Depot for a decade and was named cashier of the month in July, said he responded because he was not going to stand for racist treatment.

He asked the customer to leave and told him, “You’re lucky I’m at work, because if I wasn’t you wouldn’t be talking to me like this.”

Less than a week after the incident, Home Depot fired Rucker. His boss told him that he should have immediately called a manager and should not have approached the man, according to the Times Union.

“I’ve lived all over the country, and I’ve had no one talk to me the way this guy talked to me,” Rucker told WNYT.

A Home Depot spokesperson told WNYT that Rucker was fired for not following protocol.

“The problem here is that he had several opportunities to disengage and contact management to deal with the customer,” Home Depot said. “We’re appalled by this customer’s behavior, but we also must require associates to follow proper protocol to defuse a situation for the sake of their safety and the safety of other associates and customers.”

But the company backtracked on Friday, telling HuffPost that they had “taken another look at this situation, and we are offering Maurice his job back.”

Source, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/man-fired-from-home-depot-after-speaking-up-to-racist-customer_us_5b5232a4e4b0b15aba8ea35e, June 20, 2018.

Many people choose to work in the nursing profession because they want to help people. Of course, coming in contact with numerous people does not always bode well. Unfortunately, it is not always patients or patients’ families that cause issue as other workers could carry out actions that fall into the category of sexual harassment.

California readers may be interested in a recent study that was conducted that involved over 6,200 nurses, nurse practitioners and physician assistants answering questions about sexual harassment. The survey gave stipulations regarding what actions were considered harassment. Behaviors involving sexual comments, infringing on personal space, unwanted touching and leering were the most common reported actions. It was also noted that 11 percent of the participants indicated that they had personally experienced sexual harassment while at work.

In addition to asking about the specific actions that occurred, the survey also looked at the emotional impacts of the incidents. Nearly 90 percent of participants who experienced the harassment indicated that the events were moderately to very upsetting. Additionally, 73 percent of the participants stated that the harassment interfered with their work-related abilities.

Nurses, NPs and PAs are often the first line of help for individuals struggling with medical concerns. When they are unable to perform their duties to the best of their abilities due to suffering sexual harassment on the job, many others can suffer as well. If California workers have been the victims of this type of harassment on the job, they may want to speak with knowledgeable attorneys about their options for seeking justice.

Fifty years after the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) was passed, ageism remains too common and accepted, says a new report from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Released June 26, 2018, the report examined age discrimination in the U.S. since the ADEA took effect, outlawing employment discrimination against anyone at least 40 years old. Despite the ban, the EEOC received 18,376 charges of age discrimination during fiscal year 2017.

Charges filed with federal and state enforcement agencies represent a fraction of the likely discrimination that occurs in the workplace. One key reason is that ageism can be difficult to prove, so most discriminatory and harassing conduct goes unreported, according to the EEOC’s Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace.

A study that AARP conducted last year with 3,900 people ages 45 and older who were employed or looking for work found that six out of 10 older workers report seeing or experiencing ageism and 90 percent said it was common.

Victoria A. Lipnic, EEOC acting chair, called ageism “an open secret.”

“Like harassment, everyone knows [age discrimination] happens every day to workers in all kinds of jobs, but few speak up,” she said in a news release accompanying the report.

“There is still much that needs to be done to strengthen the law, work with employers and dispel myths about older workers,” said David Certner, AARP legislative counsel and legal policy director in Washington, D.C.

Ageism is much like other forms of discrimination, the EEOC noted. Stereotypes about the abilities and qualifications of women, for example, were based “on assumptions about the appropriate roles of women in the workplace and society,” the agency pointed out.

Although older workers today are better educated, living longer and staying in the workplace longer than those of previous generations, discrimination and outdated assumptions about them continue, Lipnic pointed out in the report.

And EEOC data shows the demographics of workers who file ADEA charges have changed dramatically over the years. In 1990, men filed almost twice as many charges as women. But by 2010, the number of women filing age charges had surpassed the number of men filing age charges, a trend that continues today. Additionally, the number of age discrimination charges among racial groups has grown with each decade.

The issue affects all industries. The Communications Workers of America in May added Facebook, Ikea and hundreds of other companies to a class-action lawsuit alleging age discrimination. The suit, Bradley v. T-Mobile, claims that the defendants target their job ads on Facebook so that only the social networking site’s younger users see them.

Source: SHRM, https://leclerclecldev.wpengine.com/wp-contentwww.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/behavioral-competencies/global-and-cultural-effectiveness/Pages/EEOC-Ageism-Persists-in-the-Workplace.aspx, June 29, 2018.

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Rss Feed