Catholic Hospital Faces Lawsuit for Transgender Discrimination

The California Appeals court reinstated a lawsuit against Dignity Health, a Catholic hospital chain, filed after they barred a hysterectomy for a transgender patient. The court found that the state’s interest in fighting LGBTQ discrimination outweighs the facility’s alleged right to impose religious standards on healthcare they provide.

The patient denied a hysterectomy who filed suit against Dignity Health was Evan Minton. Minton’s hysterectomy surgery was cancelled abruptly in 2016 when officials at Dignity’s Mercy San Juan Medical Center in Carmichael, California discovered he was transgender. The hospital claims their actions in cancelling Minton’s surgery complied with the church’s ethical and religious directives for Catholic Health Care Services that prohibit sterilization procedures except in very rare circumstances.

The appeals court found in favor of the patient stating that any burden California places on the exercise of religion is justified by the state’s interest in ensuring equal access to medical treatment for all residents regardless of sexual orientation. The case will return to San Francisco County Superior Court for further proceedings and trial. The appellate court’s ruling may limit the ability of Catholic health facilities in California to limit what healthcare services are provided to patients. A number of procedures are forbidden by the previously cited Ethical and Religious Directives. Most denied treatments and procedures are associated with women’s reproductive rights, end-of-life care, and treatments for transgender patients.

In the Ethical and Religious Directives document, certain treatments and procedures are described as “intrinsically evil.” Some of these treatments include abortion, euthanasia, direct sterilization, and assisted suicide. Administrators and employees of the facility are barred from assisting patients with these procedures or referring them to outside providers for the services. Local bishops must approve any exceptions.

If you need help due to discrimination in the workplace or if you need to file an employment law lawsuit, please get in touch with one of Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP’s offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside or Chicago.

Netflix Original Documentary Brings Up Bikram Choudhury’s Numerous Sexual Misconduct Lawsuits

The Netflix original documentary called “Bikram: Yogi, Guru, Predator” from Academy Award-winning filmmaker Eva Orner tells the story of Bikram Choudhury. Choudhury is the controversial yoga instructor who faced numerous lawsuits for sexual misconduct. The film premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival and highlights the various stories from women who sued the Indian American yoga teacher. It also artfully explores that contradiction between the healing nature of the discipline and the harmful behavior of the founder.

Orner, the filmmaker, is now asking California lawmakers to reopen the sexual misconduct and sexual assault cases against the yoga instructor. Orner hopes Gavin Newsom, the California governor, watches the film on Netflix and is inspired to call the LA District Attorney to request that she reopen the case.  

The California State Court of Appeal dismissed Choudhury’s 2017 plea and ordered him to pay $7.3 million to Miakshi Jafa-Bodden, his former attorney, who sued him for wrongful termination and sexual harassment. A string of other women made similar claims against Choudhury claiming he raped, sexually abused or harassed them.

Orner also made appeals to the yoga studios bearing his name to drop it and use generic names instead. She is adamant that no woman should go to a Bikram studio – they should go to a hot yoga studio instead.

When Choudhury arrived on the scene from Kolkata in the early 1970’s, he quickly achieved near-celebrity status and created a global fitness empire that left him extremely wealthy. By the 2010’s, he was facing numerous sexual harassment and abuse allegations.

If you have been sexually harassed in the workplace or if you have questions about what an experienced employment law attorney can do for you, please get in touch with one of Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP’s offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside or Chicago.

Walgreens Employee Fired for Using Discriminatory Language Files Wrongful Termination Lawsuit

A senior maintenance mechanic, Robert Marvel, was employed at a Walgreens warehouse in Northern California until December 2018. Marvel claims there was a spill and he passed along a request from another employee for a “wet vac,” a vacuum commonly used to deal with liquid messes. The Latina co-worker to whom Marvel made the request reported that he called her a wetback. Marvel insists that she misheard his request for a wet vac, but alleges he was not given a chance to defend himself before he was suspended the next day. A week later, he was fired from his job of 13 years.

Marvel was employed by Walgreens in their Woodland warehouse where he was responsible for maintaining various equipment and repairing conveyor belts. According to the lawsuit, Marvel had excellent work performance reviews. Marvel claims that he loved his job and had plans to stay until he retired.

Co-workers describe Marvel as a man of compassion and integrity, but the company summarily branded him a bigot and discarded him as if he was worthless. The wrongful termination lawsuit against Walgreens also alleges defamation and discrimination. The suit seeks unspecified damages. In a court filing, Walgreens’ legal counsel denied Marvel’s allegations and also stated that even if his allegations were proven, the company will not be shown to have violated the employee’s rights.

In addition to proclaiming Marvel’s version of events, the lawsuit cites numerous public and common usages of the phrase “wet vac” in newspapers, advertisements, catalogs, etc. in an effort to show that Marvel’s use of the phrase was not out of the norm. The Latina who reported that Marvel referred to her as a “wetback” later that same day spoke to Marvel regarding the incident, but Marvel had no idea what she was talking about. The next morning, he was shocked to be summoned to human resources where he was asked if he had said anything “ethnically insensitive” before he was handed his suspension. He didn’t make the connection until he was driving home. He immediately called the human resources officer to let her know that he realized where the misunderstanding occurred, but a week later Marvel received a phone call during which the same human resources staff member told him he was fired.

If you have questions about filing a wrongful termination lawsuit in California or if you have questions about what an experienced employment law attorney can do for you, please get in touch with one of Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP’s offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside or Chicago.

Court Awards Plaintiff $1.58M in Racial Harassment Lawsuit Naming UC Regents

Nicole Birden, a 48-year-old African American and former UCLA Health phlebotomist, was awarded $1.58 million in her wrongful termination and racial harassment lawsuit against the UC Regents. Birden filed the discrimination lawsuit in 2017 citing the University of California Board of Regents for wrongful termination and discrimination.

Birden started working at UCLA in 2015 and claims she experienced a hostile work environment filled with co-workers calling her derogatory names, bullying on the job and even tampering with her work. Allegedly, Birden’s co-workers took the harassment so far that they tampered with blood samples in order to sabotage her work. In response to the escalating harassment and discrimination, Birden complained to her supervisor. She was fired in 2016. Birden was allegedly referred to as the “black girl with the attitude” by a number of co-workers while she was employed at UCLA.

UCLA’s legal representation argued that Birden was terminated due to a pattern or poor performance. He also made it clear to the jurors that the plaintiff never claimed she was treated differently because she was African American in her original complaints. UCLA is disappointed with the verdict and claim to be reviewing their options.

UCLA also claims that they consider ensuring a respectful and inclusive work environment to be essential to the university’s overall mission. They feel they encourage their employees to report any concerns in order to allow the issues to be reviewed and then appropriately addressed by management and administration at the university. They also restated their belief that UCLA Health is dedicated to maintaining a positive workplace without discrimination, harassment or retaliation.

If you have experienced discrimination in the workplace or if you need to file a harassment lawsuit, please get in touch with one of the experienced California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik and DeBlouw LLP today.

Discrimination Lawsuit Filed: Alleged Racial Discrimination on Sewer Project

According to claims made by African-American workers (and the union that supports them), three white supervisors on the largest public works project in Akron history used racist language, discriminated against their black employees by assigning them “stupid” work that paid less than other assignments, and retaliated when employees complained about the harassment by firing them.

The racial discrimination complaint was filed in Summit County Common Pleas Court on behalf of three African American workers from Akron and another African American worker from Copley. All four workers were hired by Kenny Construction and the Obayashi Corporation. They were hired for the $184 million Ohio Canal Interceptor Tunnel (OCIT) project. The project to install a huge concrete-lined sewer pipe requires workers to bore a mile under downtown Akron.

The plaintiffs in the case allege that managers, supervisors, and representatives of the company and project as a whole referred to African-American workers using the n-word, called them “worthless,” referred to them as “yard dogs,” “them boys,” “the blacks in the back,” and “stupid.”

The company’s parent company, Granite Construction Inc. responded to the allegations stating that the Kenny/Obayashi team is proud of the work they have completed on the project and the support they have received from the community and that they deny all allegations made in the complaint. They also stated that they intend to vigorously defend the company against what they referred to as “false and inflammatory” accusations.

Obayashi is one of the largest builders in Japan. On the Obayashi website they describe their company as fulfilling their corporate responsibilities as the best way to “bring smiles to people” and they make this the goal of their overall business activities as they strive to meet the expectations of the public and respond to their stakeholders’ needs.

According to the discrimination lawsuit, the black employees on the sewer project were subject to “racial belittling” and were typically assigned to “yard crews” excluded from work opportunities available to others on the job site like working on the tunnel boring machine. Workers assigned to work on the tunnel boring machine were allowed overtime hours to work around the clock when the project fell behind schedule due to late arrival of equipment, etc. According to allegations made in the overtime lawsuit, management reserved most of the positions on the boring machine for Caucasian employees.

Black employees who spoke up about the situation and the discrimination occurring on the job site were allegedly fired.

If you are not being paid overtime wages you are due or if you need to file an overtime lawsuit, please get in touch with one of the experienced California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik and DeBlouw LLP today.

The Hooters Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Settlement

In recent news, two male employees at a Hooters restaurant claim they were sexually harassed by a male boss while on the job and then retaliated against when they complained about their boss’s alleged misconduct. Both filed sexual harassment lawsuits against the Hooters restaurant chain. The first plaintiff, Paul “PJ” Cagnina, obtained an undisclosed settlement in May 2017. The second plaintiff, Scott Peterson, appeared to come to a settlement regarding the case in July 2019. 

On July 16th, Hooters attorneys filed paperwork with the Los Angeles Superior Court stating that the part of the case filed by Scott Peterson was resolved. No terms of any settlement were divulged.

The original suit was filed in March of 2016 seeking unspecified damages and a court order requiring Hooters to stop allowing sexual harassment and retaliation on the job. In court papers, the company stated that they have a strict policy the forbids any form of sexual harassment, discrimination or retaliation and the attorneys for the defendant argued the plaintiffs did not suffer any damages.  

Peterson, one of the plaintiffs in the case, claimed his boss touched him inappropriately, talked about him in a sexually demeaning way while they were in meetings with Hooters general managers, and sent photos to the plaintiff of a female co-worker claiming to have slept with her.

Cagnina, the other plaintiff in the case, claimed that his boss threw him down on the ground in the parking lot after a bikini contest at the Hooters in Costa Mesa and engaged in a simulated act of sex with the plaintiff in front of other people still on site. Cagnina also claimed that his supervisor repeatedly tried to get him to go skinny dipping with women who worked at the restaurant who were Cagnina’s subordinates on the job. Cagnina claims that when he was being honored as a new general manager, the boss publicly referred to unflattering and sexually demeaning nicknames like PGay and “cagina.”

Both plaintiffs claimed they experienced retaliation in the workplace after they complained about the boss’ alleged behavior with Peterson claiming he was ultimately fired as a result of complaining about the misconduct.

If you need to file a discrimination lawsuit or if you have been wrongfully terminated, the experienced California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP can help. Get in touch today so we can help you protect your rights.

Will Gender Discrimination Lawsuit Force Google HR Changes?

The recent settlement Google reached for an age discrimination lawsuit included wide range change in the company’s HR practices – particularly their recruiting practices and employee surveys. This lawsuit was different than others with similar claims due to the management changes the plaintiffs demanded. It is a good example of the potential impact discrimination lawsuits can have on hiring and firing.

The original complaint was filed in 2015. The Google age discrimination lawsuit alleged that the median age for U.S. workers is 42, but that Google’s median employee age is 29. The suit further claimed that Google favored job applicants under 40 in their hiring process. The lead plaintiff in the case was Cheryl Fillekes, who has a Ph.D. in geophysics. She was invited to four separate job interviews with Google from the age of 47+, but she was never hired. She claimed it was due to age discrimination and filed a complaint in federal court in California.

The age discrimination class action case was settled in federal court for $11 million. Over 200 parties were involved. As a result of this case, Google was required to train their employees and managers regarding age-based bias. They also had to create a subcommittee for their recruiting operations that focused solely on age diversity in their engineering departments. Google will need to make sure that their marketing reflects age diversity, and that employees leaving the company are surveyed about any possible discrimination.

The plaintiffs in the case hope that the training and survey requirements included in the settlement raise awareness of the issue of age discrimination as well as help to decrease bias against older, highly experienced tech professionals who struggle to find employment. The purpose of the subcommittee is to make sure the hiring process is not structured to discriminate against older applicants and the increased diversity in marketing materials is intended to encourage a more diverse group of applicants.

If you have experienced age discrimination during the hiring process or in the workplace, please get in touch with the experienced California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP so we can help.