SIGNS YOU MAY HAVE BEEN FIRED ILLEGALLY IN CALIFORNIA

There are many, many things that California employers can do to intentionally or unintentionally illegally fire employees. In doing so, they not only treat employees unfairly, they also may expose themselves to a wrongful termination lawsuit.

MOST CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEES HAVE NO IDEA THEY WERE WRONGFULLY TERMINATED…UNTIL IT’S TOO LATE

– When a California fast-food worker gets fired for complaining about being forced to work through meal and rest breaks, he may have been wrongful terminated.

– When a California administrative assistant gets fired for being four months pregnant, she may have been wrongful terminated.

– When a California truck driver gets fired for having a legal medical marijuana prescription, he may have been wrongful terminated.

– When a California warehouse worker quits after being harassed and demeaned by a boss, she may have been wrongful terminated.

Do you know what it’s like to be “wrongfully terminated”…?

If you do, you are way ahead of other California employees.

Most people who do get fired or quit have no idea that they have rights. And, that their termination from that employer may have been wrongful or illegal.

SOME SIGNS THAT YOU MAY HAVE BEEN FIRED ILLEGALLY…

Did your employer/workplace violate the law? If your employer violated any applicable California state employment law, federal labor laws, or even local/municipal laws, then you may be owed money.

Can you answer yes to any of these questions:

  • Were you fired because of the color of your skin?
  • Were you fired because of your age?
  • Were you fired because of your sex?
  • Were you fired because of your national origin
  • Were you fired because of your ethnic group?
  • Were you fired because of your religious affiliation?
  • Were you fired because of your sexual preference?
  • Were you fired because your employer violated public policy?
  • Were you fired because your employer retaliated against you?
  • Were you fired because your employer committed fraud?
  • Were you fired because of your gender identity or expression of gender identity (whether real or perceived?
  • Were you fired because of your military or former military status?
  • Were you fired because of your marital status (whether real or perceived)?
  • Were you fired because you requested past payroll records for review and analysis?
  • Were you fired because of your off-duty political activity?
  • Were you fired and your employer is withholding of payment, bonuses, or commissions?
  • Were you fired because you complained about wrongful treatment?
  • Were you fired due to retaliation for failing to perform illegal acts?
  • Were you fired because your pregnant?
  • Were you fired because you are taking (or you took) leave under the Family Medical Leave Act?
  • Were you fired because you asked for an accommodation for a medical condition or disability?
  • Were you fired because you were on jury duty?
  • Were you fired because you made a claim for Worker’s Compensation benefits?
  • Were you fired and owed money you have actually earned?

DID YOU ANSWER YES TO ANY OF THOSE QUESTIONS?

Learn more about your employee rights. Lawyers for Employee and Consumer Rights (LFECR) is a leading California employment law firm. With 40+ remote attorneys, LFECR is able to work on behalf of clients anywhere in California. Fired unfairly? Your free consult awaits! Call 888-625-0959. IM our Facebook page. Follow us on Twitter, Instagram, Medium, or LinkedIn, or our blog.

Have a great day!

THE SUPREME COURT JUST !@#%’ED CALIFORNIA WORKERS

Yet again, the little guy, the individual worker, is being robbed of his or her rights.

This time the thief is the highest federal court of the United States, the Supreme Court of the United States.

On May 21st, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on the Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis case. The 5-4 decision the Court handed down held that the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925) overrules the National Labor Relations Act of 1935).

Let’s look at some recent workers rights class-action lawsuits:

– In 2016, because of labor law violations regarding California fast food workers, McDonald’s paid $3.75 million dollars to settle a labor lawsuit.

– In 2017, female employees of Walmart filed a complaint in federal court, in Florida, related to the company’s pay and promotion practices, alleging years of gender discrimination.

– In 2017, restaurant chain Panera faced a class-action overtime suit claiming employees were not paid overtime wages they say they were owed when they worked as assistant managers.

The above cases were all strengthened because they were filed as class-action lawsuits.

WHAT IS A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT?

A class-action lawsuit is an “important and valuable part of the legal system because they permit the fair and efficient resolution of legitimate claims of numerous parties by allowing the claims to be aggregated into a single action against a defendant that has allegedly caused harm.”

Class-action lawsuits also empower individual employees to join a “class” of wronged individuals.

WHAT JUST HAPPENED TO IMPACT CALIFORNIA RESTAURANT WORKERS?

With a recent Supreme Court ruling, these class-action cases may be a thing of the past.

WHAT DOES THE RULING MEAN?

The 5-4 decision means that the class-action waivers found in arbitration agreements, as well as other clauses that require employees to arbitrate their claims individually, are enforceable and do not violate the NLRA.

HUH? BUT WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR WORKERS!

It means that the days of employees joining class action lawsuits against an employer may be gone.

It means that arbitration agreements may bar employees – individually or as a class – the access to the court system

If an employer violates wage and hour laws, or other labor laws like discrimination, unsafe work environments, and the like, that employees will only be able to bring claims as individuals, and not as a class.

It means that when California restaurants violate wage or other labor laws, employees will only be able to bring claims up individually, in arbitration, and not as a class.

Already this case is having ramifications as thousands of Chipotle workers could be shut out of wage-theft lawsuit by new supreme court ruling

Many agree that this ruling is an appalling affront of employee rights.

WHY IS THIS A VICTORY FOR EMPLOYERS?

This case is seen as a victory for employers because it could significantly reduce the number of claims brought against them, and because historically, cases in arbitration favor the employer over the employee.

MOST CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEES DO NOT KNOW THEIR RIGHTS!

That’s the unfortunate reality. Most California employees think that just because they work in an “at-will” stare that they have no rights. Nothing could be further from the truth.

WHAT SHOULD EMPLOYEES DO IF THEY HAVE BEEN WRONGFULLY TERMINATED?

Learn more about your employee rights. Lawyers for Employee and Consumer Rights (LFECR) is a leading California employment law firm. With 40+ remote attorneys, LFECR is able to work on behalf of clients anywhere in California. Fired unfairly? Your free consult awaits! Call 888-625-0959. IM our Facebook page. Follow us on IG, Medium, or LinkedIn, 

Have a great day!

CAN FAST FOOD WORKERS SUE THE GIANT FRANCHISES THEY WORK FOR?

If you work for a restaurant – whether it a McDonald’s or the nicest steak house in town – then you have rights. If your employee rights have been violated while working for a restaurant, then legally protecting those rights can be a scary proposition. Most employees have no idea that their rights have been violated, and even if they do they can be too afraid to pursue legal options. Over the years in fact, most fast food chain and/or restaurant franchisee workers whose rights have been violated have not pursued their legal options. Why? Because they think they will not be able to prove the violations.

LET’S HAVE A LOOK AT SOME OF THE MANY TIMES WORKERS HAVE WON SETTLEMENTS AGAINST LARGE RESTAURANT COMPANIES

Here is a small sample of multi-million dollar lawsuits and settlements that large restaurant corporations have paid out to unfairly treated employees:

—- In 2015, a class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of every single server and bartender who worked at restaurant chain Ruby Tuesday.The lawsuit alleged that Ruby Tuesday violated labor law by paying servers and bartenders and other restaurant staff below minimum wage.

—- In 2014, Outback Steakhouse’s parent company was sued in a wage and hour lawsuit. The legal action alleged that employees were asked to donate (as in work for free!) hours to the company. Eventually, Outback Steakhouse agreed to settle for $3 million.

—- In an earlier 2009 lawsuit, Outback Steakhouse agreed to pay more than $19 million in a sex discrimination lawsuit.

—- In 2016, McDonald’s settled a $3.75 million lawsuit claiming it had violated the rights of about 800 California restaurant workers.

—- Just last year, in 2017, the massive Mexican food restaurant Chipotle – with so many California employees – was sued. The lawsuit alleged that Chipolte did not pay overtime.

YES, A SINGLE EMPLOYEE CAN SUE A RESTAURANT

Let’s walk through one example of how you – as a restaurant employee – may be owed money after you have been fired or quit. While there are some exceptions, if you worked more than eight hours a day or more than 40 hours a week, then the restaurant you worked for must pay you an what’s called a “time-and-a-half” overtime rate.

If they did not pay you overtime, then you may be owed money.

In fact, there are many reasons a fired restaurant employee may be owed money.

YES – YOU CAN SUE YOUR EMPLOYER, NO MATTER HOW BIG

If you are a California employee, and your employee rights have been violated, you should not be afraid to contact an employment attorney. It is incredibly easy to contact a California employee rights lawyer that has experience protecting restaurant workers rights.

MOST CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEES DO NOT KNOW THEIR RIGHTS!

That’s the unfortunate reality. Most California employees think that just because they work in an “at-will” stare that they have no rights. Nothing could be further from the truth. Learn more about your employee rights. Lawyers for Employee and Consumer Rights (LFECR) is a leading California employment law firm. With 40+ remote attorneys, LFECR is able to work on behalf of clients anywhere in California. Fired unfairly? Your free consult awaits! Call 888-625-0959. IM our Facebook page. Follow us on Twitter, IG, Medium, LinkedIn, or our blog. Have a great day!

 

HOW MUCH DOES MY BOSS OWE ME IF I AM DISCRIMINATED AGAINST?

That is the million dollar question.

If you get fired for any reason, or quite for any reason, you may be owed money!

Fired For Any Reason?

 

HOW MUCH?

That depends on a number of factors and can be best determined by understanding your workplace rights.

FIRST THINGS FIRST…

One of the lest enviable positions an employee can find themselves in is needing the job AND being harassed or discriminated against at work. What is one supposed to do? You need the job. The money. You need to support your family. BUT…You are being treated unfairly.

FEDERAL LAWS PROTECT YOU, BUT MAYBE NOT AS MUCH AS CALIFORNIA LAW

Federal law does prohibit discrimination by employers; however, California law extends protections to certain groups where federal law may not.

Let’s look at some of the federal laws. The federal laws include but are not limited to:

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 – This monumental and historical development in glass/group employment protection outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin

The Americans with Disabilities Act – The ADA is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on disability.

The Equal Pay Act of 1963 – The Equal Pay Act prohibits discrimination based on sex.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 – You guessed it. The Age Discrimination Act protects against age-related discrimination.

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 – This act “The act bars the use of genetic information in health insurance and employment: it prohibits group health plans and health insurers from denying coverage to a healthy individual or charging that person higher premiums based solely on a genetic predisposition to developing a disease in the future, and it bars employers from using individuals’ genetic information when making hiring, firing, job placement, or promotion decisions”.

CALIFORNIA LAW GOES EVEN FURTHER TO PROTECT YOU…

Thankfully, California gets even more specific in it’s protection of employees against workplace discrimination:

California’s California Fair Employment and Housing Act of 1959 (FEHA) – This act is a is a powerful California statute used to fight sexual harassment and other forms of unlawful discrimination in employment and housing,

– The California Family Rights Act (CFRA) – Also known as the also known as the Family Temporary Disability Insurance (FTDI) program, is a law enacted in 2002 that extends unemployment disability compensation to cover individuals who take time off work to care for a seriously ill family member or bond with a new minor child.

While California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) protects the people of California from unlawful discrimination in employment, that does not mean that there is no workplace discrimination.

There is workplace discrimination. It happens each and every day.

And you should know your rights.

If you get fired for any reason, or quit for any reason, you may be owed money!

FIRED FOR ANY REASON? CALL 888-625-0959 FOR A FREE CONSULT!

If you have questions right now, Instant Message your question at the LFECR Facebook page. Call Lawyers for Employee and Consumer Rights today…You may be owed money!

“SUPREME COURT DECISION DELIVERS BLOW TO WORKERS’ RIGHTS” — NPR

U.S. Supreme Court just delivered a major blow to workers!

Supreme Court Decision Delivers Blow To Workers’ Rights

People wait in line to enter the U.S. Supreme Court last month. The court sided with businesses on not allowing class-action lawsuits for federal labor violations.

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Updated at 7:08 p.m. ET

In a case involving the rights of tens of millions of private sector employees, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, delivered a major blow to workers, ruling for the first time that workers may not band together to challenge violations of federal labor laws.

Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch said that the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act trumps the National Labor Relations Act and that employees who sign employment agreements to arbitrate claims must do so on an individual basis — and may not band together to enforce claims of wage and hour violations.

“The policy may be debatable but the law is clear: Congress has instructed that arbitration agreements like those before us must be enforced as written,” Gorsuch writes. “While Congress is of course always free to amend this judgment, we see nothing suggesting it did so in the NLRA — much less that it manifested a clear intention to displace the Arbitration Act. Because we can easily read Congress’s statutes to work in harmony, that is where our duty lies.”

Ginsburg dissents

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the four dissenters, called the majority opinion “egregiously wrong.” She said the 1925 arbitration law came well before federal labor laws and should not cover these “arm-twisted,” “take-it-or-leave it” provisions that employers are now insisting on.

She noted that workers’ claims are usually small, and many workers fear retaliation. For these reasons, she said, relatively few workers avail themselves of the arbitration option. On the other hand, these problems are largely by a class-action suit brought in court on behalf of many employees.

The inevitable result of Monday’s decision, she warned, will be huge underenforcement of federal and state laws designed to advance the well-being of vulnerable workers. It is up to Congress, she added, to correct the court’s action.

In his oral announcement, Gorsuch took the unusual step of elaborately rebutting Ginsburg’s dissent, which is five pages longer than the majority’s opinion.

A green light for employers

The ruling came in three cases — potentially involving tens of thousands of nonunion employees — brought against Ernst & Young LLP, Epic Systems Corp. and Murphy Oil USA Inc.

Each required its individual employees, as a condition of employment, to waive their rights to join a class-action suit. In all three cases, employees tried to sue together, maintaining that the amounts they could obtain in individual arbitration were dwarfed by the legal fees they would have to pay. Ginsburg’s dissent noted that a typical Ernst & Young employee would likely have to spend $200,000 to recover only about $1,900 in overtime pay.

The employees contended that their right to collective action is guaranteed by the National Labor Relations Act. The employers countered that they are entitled to ban collective legal action under the Federal Arbitration Act, which was enacted in 1925 to reverse the judicial hostility to arbitration at the time.

Employment lawyers were elated. Ron Chapman, who represents management in labor-management disputes, said he expects small and large businesses alike to immediately move to impose these binding arbitration contracts to eliminate the fear of costly class-action verdicts from juries. “It gives employers the green light to eliminate their single largest employment law risk with the stroke of a pen,” he said.

Implications for #MeToo

Labor law experts said Monday’s decision very likely will present increasing problems for the #MeToo movement, and for other civil rights class actions claiming discrimination based on race, gender and religion. There is no transparency in most binding arbitration agreements, and they often include nondisclosure provisions. What’s more, class actions deal with the expense and fear of retaliation problems of solo claims. As Ginsburg put it, “there’s safety in numbers.”

Yale Law professor Judith Resnick observed that the decision applies to all manner of class actions. “What this says is that when you buy something, use something, or work for someone, that entity can require you to waive your right to use public courts,” she noted.

Cornell University labor law professor Angela Cornell expects the number of these litigation waivers to skyrocket now. “What we see is the privatization of our justice system,” she said.

A study by the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute shows that 56 percent of nonunion private sector employees are currently subject to mandatory individual arbitration procedures under the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act, which allows employers to bar collective legal actions by employees.

The court’s decision means that tens of millions of private nonunion employees will be barred from suing collectively over the terms of their employment.