Disney Facing Discrimination, Harassment, and Wrongful Termination Claims

Douglas Keith Harris, a 57-year-old African American and former Disney employee, filed a California employment law lawsuit alleging discrimination, harassment, and workplace retaliation based on his age, disability, race, and veteran status. The discrimination and retaliation lawsuit was filed after Harris’ 32-year career with the company was abruptly terminated. 

Former Disney Employee Files California Discrimination Lawsuit:

Harris’ lawsuit seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory and punitive damages. The lawsuit is filed against Disney in Los Angeles and alleges that veteran Harris’s exemplary 32-year career suddenly ended after he was falsely accused of brandishing a firearm at work to another co-worker. Harris claims there is no evidence that he had a gun at work. 

History of Discrimination in the Workplace:

The complaint outlines an alleged history of discrimination in the workplace. According to Harris, his younger superiors regularly mocked him for his disability (being deaf in one ear) and frequently advised him to retire. Harris also claims that his superiors abused their power over him to change his schedule when he returned after a surgery – assigning him the graveyard shift. In January 2020, Harris’ discrimination and harassment complaints ended with the accusation that he brought a gun into the workplace.  

Disney’s Response to the Accusation Against Harris:

Harris claims that instead of speaking to him after the accusation was made, Disney instead contacted the police. As a result, Harris’ car and belongings were searched. The officers did not find a gun or any other weapons. Disney ignored Harris’ pleas that he did not bring a gun to work and did not have a gun, and immediately suspended him. Harris claims Disney treated him like a criminal, and he suffered extreme emotional distress. One week later, Disney fired Harris.

Allegations Include Discrimination, Harassment, and Retaliation:

Harris’ lawsuit alleges Disney violated California labor in several ways: discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, and defamation. Harris claims the employment law violations were based on race, veteran status, and disability.

If you need to discuss workplace discrimination or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Lawsuit Against LA Sparks, Ex-GM Claims Wrongful Termination

Former Los Angeles Sparks general manager, Toler, filed a wrongful termination lawsuit in the California Superior Court in Los Angeles County against both the franchise itself and the former COO Christine Simmons. Proceedings for the wrongful termination case are scheduled to start August 20th, 2020. 

Former General Manager Filed Wrongful Termination Complaint:

Toler, LA Spark’s former general manager, filed the wrongful termination lawsuit in March 2020, right before the courts were shut down in response to California’s emergency declaration due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The discovery phase of the case begins in August 2020. Toler claims that LA Sparks managing partner, Eric Holoman, wrongfully terminated her in October after an ESPN report that Toler used the “N-word” in the locker room after a playoff loss.

Toler Claims Termination Stemmed from Confrontations Regarding Toxic Work Environment:

Toler claims that the media report was used as an excuse to terminate her from her position, but that she was actually fired because she persisted in confronting the toxic work environment created due to an affair between Holoman and Simmons and alleged sexual misconduct on the part of Brian Agler, the team’s former head coach.

Calling the WNBA Out for Silence on the Toler Issue Amidst Black Lives Matter Movement:

Toler’s claims pit one of the WNBA’s original executives against the franchise she ran for decades and calls the leagues handling of Agler, its commitment of equity, and its support of equality into question. Toler’s attorney questions whether the WNBA can have an honest conversation about race and equality in the WNBA without looking into the issues of the Toler wrongful termination case. Toler’s legal counsel also pointed out that it’s shocking to hear the silence from the WNBA on the Toler issue while they simultaneously make comments about Black Lives Matter and equality…he suggests they look to their own house first.

The History of the Toler Wrongful Termination Case:

According to Toler, Simmons’ presence in the organization after resigning as COO in December 2018 created difficulty for Toler to perform her duties as a general manager. After leaving the Sparks for positions as COO of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and as regent for the University of California system, supposedly continued the extra-marital affair with Holoman, Sparks managing partner, and a close friendship with Candace Parker (franchise star). Toler was left with Holoman as the cause of her difficulties on the job, as well as the only person she could turn to for help with the problem. Toler also claims that she was inhibited while attempting to construct the Sparks roster because it was made clear to her that Parker was off-limits in any trade discussions. Toler alleges gender discrimination, retaliation, breach of contract, wrongful termination, non-payment of wages, and unfair business practices.

If you need to file a discrimination lawsuit or if you need to discuss other employment law violations, don’t hesitate to get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Courts See Increase in Covid-19 Lawsuits Nationwide

Right now, the nation is struggling with the rippling effects of the Covid-19 pandemic, including devastating impacts on many California businesses. As California employers struggle to maintain and reopen their businesses, they face another issue: Covid-19 lawsuits.

The Number of Covid-19 Lawsuits is Increasing:

Over 2,000 lawsuits relating to Covid-19 were filed in Federal and State courts as of the beginning of summer 2020. Some claims are exposure related; others focus on employee claims relating to workplace health and safety, discrimination violations, or wrongful termination.  As of the middle of June 2020, over 230 lawsuits citing employment law violations were filed in connection to Covid-19; including 30 class-action lawsuits). Interestingly enough, California is leading the nation in the number of Covid-19 employment law cases with 32 lawsuits already filed with the courts.

Three of the Most Common Workplace Liability Covid-19 Claims:

Many California employers are facing allegations of workplace liability due to the rapid pace at which the government (at federal, state, and local levels) enact laws to respond to the ever-changing Covid-19 pandemic and how it is addressed in public spaces and the workplace.

Common Workplace Liability Covid-19 Claim: Paid Leave Claims

Paid Leave Claims: New laws, ordinances, or regulations were adopted by the federal government (Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA)), and state/local governments connected to employee paid leave during the Covid-19 pandemic. Many Covid-19 employment law claims allege that employees were denied leave or that employees saw workplace retaliation due to seeking leave.

Common Workplace Liability Covid-19 Claim: Discrimination Claims

Since the number of discrimination claims tend to increase alongside unemployment rates, it’s fair to assume the unprecedented levels of Covid-19 related unemployment will coincide with unprecedented numbers of workplace discrimination claims. The Americans with Disabilities Act regulates what medical information employers can seek from their workers, and requires that employers provide reasonable accommodation for employees with disabilities. The Americans with Disabilities Act seems to be a likely source for a significant number of Covid-19 discrimination claims. Other laws that prohibit discrimination based on pregnancy, age, gender, etc. may also see an increase in discrimination claims, particularly as businesses begin to urge workers to return to the workplace. Some employers who prevent or discourage older workers/pregnant workers from returning to the workplace may find themselves facing legal consequences even if they intended to protect their workers from exposure. (The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission prohibits employers from preventing older workers or pregnant workers from returning to work if they wish to do so).

Common Workplace Liability Covid-19 Claim: RIFS & Downsizing Claims

When businesses are forced to downsize their workforce due to Covid-19, they should be cautious and consider the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act. Under WARN, employers must provide workers with 60 days’ notice before they are laid off for an extended period or before the business is closed (certain exceptions are provided, but the applicability of any exceptions in relation to Covid-19 business layoffs and closures is still unclear). Additionally, WARN’s “lookback” provisions may require a notice even if an employer is not letting all their employees go at the same time. Businesses reopening with uncertainty regarding the coming months should carefully consider the WARN Act obligations as well as applicable state laws.

If you need to discuss other employment law violations related to the Covid-19 pandemic or if you need to file an employment law Covid-19 lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago. 

Lawsuit Alleging Unchecked Sexual Harassment on the Set of Popular TV Show Criminal Minds

In recent news, Disney, CBS, and the Criminal Minds executive producers face allegations that any who resisted the advances of the popular TV show’s Director of Photography were terminated. The show’s final episode aired in February 2020 after a successful run of several seasons. In June of 2020, California’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the different studios and executive producers behind the CBS show.

Allegations of Sexual Harassment Amid Successful Completion of CBS’s Criminal Minds:

The Los Angeles Superior Court complaint alleges sexual harassment and “sexual touching” by Gregory St. Johns, Director of Photography for CBS’s Criminal Minds. Court action is not new for St. Johns, but this action is different because accusations are not aimed at him alone – authorities are also going after The Walt Disney Company, CBS Studios, ABC Signature Studios, and several other individuals in connection to the alleged sexual harassment on set.

Were Workers on the Popular CBS TV Series Subjected to a Hostile Work Environment?

According to the suit, the defendants made it possible for St. Johns to create an intimidating, hostile, and offensive work environment that went unchecked. St. Johns was allegedly protected by the executive production team (showrunner Erica Messer, Executive Producer Harry Bring, Executive Producer John Breen Frazier, Director Glenn Kershaw, and Unit Production Manager Stacey Beneville).

The Executive Teams Allegedly Supported Unlawful Sexual Harassment and Discrimination:

According to the lawsuit, St. Johns’ sexual harassment continued for years without recourse. The executive team allegedly had actual knowledge of the abusive behavior St. Johns subjected other workers to on the job, and even condoned his unlawful conduct. The executive teams took no actions to prevent any sexual harassment or discrimination throughout the years. Instead of administering appropriate corrective actions for unlawful behavior, the executives fired anyone that resisted or evaded St. Johns’ abuse/advances.

Allegations of Rampant, Unchecked Sexual Harassment in the Workplace:

• Anthony Matulic, former technician, allegedly resisted a butt slap and was fired after complaining.

• Dauv McNeeley, video playback department worker, was dismissed after corroborating similar allegations against St. Johns.

• Over a dozen other men were fired at St. Johns’ request due to similar scenarios.

Walt Disney’s Employee Relations department is accused of conducting several inadequate investigations allegedly designed to exonerate St. Johns due to various sexual harassment complaints. St. Johns was eventually removed, but only after a popular media outlet ran a story based on some of the allegations.

If you need to discuss how to file a discrimination lawsuit or wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Burma Superstar Restaurant Workers Awarded $1.3M in Class Action Suit

Burma Superstar restaurant workers alleging failure to pay overtime and failure to provide required sick leave were awarded a $1.3 million class-action settlement.

Local California Restaurant Accused of Unfair and Unpaid Wages:

Owners of local restaurant chain Burma Superstar (with locations in Oakland, Alameda, and San Francisco) face allegations including failure to pay minimum wage, failure to pay mandatory overtime, failure to provide sick leave, and failure to provide mandatory rest periods and meal breaks.

Current and Former California Restaurant Workers File Class Action Lawsuit:

The California class action was filed in Alameda County Superior Court. Class members include 350 current and former Burma Superstar kitchen workers. In June 2020, the California judge hearing the case issued a $1.3 million settlement in favor of the plaintiffs. The workers are proud that they stood up for themselves and hope they made some real change. One of the plaintiffs who went on record was William Navarette, a Burma Superstar dishwasher, food preparer, and cook. Navarette was employed by the local California restaurant from 2011 through 2016 and worked at all three locations in San Francisco, Oakland, and Alameda.

Workers Allege California Labor Law Violations:  

According to the lawsuit, workers were required to work full-time hours (8 hours per day and 40 hours per week), but were not classified as full-time employees by Burma Superstar restaurant. Workers also allege that the restaurant did not provide the required 30-minute meal breaks or mandatory 10 minute rest periods as outlined by labor laws. According to the court documents, workers allege they were provided a fixed salary that totaled less than 2x California’s minimum wage.

The Defendant’s Response to the Allegations:  

Burma Superstar owner, Desmond Tan, said the restaurant has always been and continues to be dedicated to the well-being of their workers. They strongly disagree with the allegations in the lawsuit and claim they settled the suit to move forward. They’re glad it’s over and can now look forward to doing what they love, providing Bay area residents with the best Burmese cuisine.

The Pandemic Caused Massive Decrease in Traffic:

Before the novel coronavirus was declared a pandemic, the Burma Superstar restaurants typically had lines out the door. Californians happily waited for a table at one of their popular locations. During these challenging times, restaurants like Burma Superstar depend heavily on community support and dedicated employees – restaurant workers are a huge part of any restaurant’s success. In addition to the $1.3 million settlement, Burma Superstar restaurants also agreed to restore tips to their kitchen staff, return back holiday and time-off benefits, and provide Burmese, Spanish, and Chinese translations of their employee handbooks. 

If you have questions about how to identify California labor law violations or if you need to file a class-action lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

$5.7M Settlement Follows Cognizant Overtime Lawsuit

Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp., IT services giant, recently agreed to settle an overtime lawsuit for $5.7 million. The lawsuit included allegations that the firm failed to pay a group of US employees for overtime hours worked. 

What is Overtime Under California Law?

According to California state law, employers are required to pay all nonexempt employees daily overtime one and one-half times the employee’s regular rate of pay for all hours they work over 8 hours (up to and including 12 hours in any workday), and for the first 8 hours worked on the seventh consecutive day of work in a workweek.

The Plaintiff in the California Overtime Case:

While the Cognizant overtime lawsuit is a class action covering several different, but similar workers, the named worker in the lawsuit is Debi Mishar. Mishar was a testing analyst for a Sacramento Blue Shield of California location for Cognizant. The other workers included in the class action were also workers in the company’s quality assurance testing business.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations: California Overtime Class Action Lawsuit

According to the documents included in the California overtime class action, Mishar was paid an annual salary until August 2012, when Cognizant switched his payment to an hourly wage. Mishar alleges that the defendant underpaid overtime by failing to include certain amounts of pay when they calculated the employee’s “regular rate of pay” used to calculate overtime pay.

The Cognizant California Overtime Class Action Lawsuit: 

The overtime class action lawsuit was filed in US Federal Court on August 25, 2017. The court granted preliminary approval of the $5.7 million settlement earlier this month. A hearing is set to seek final approval on November 12, 2020.

If you need to talk to someone about violations in the workplace or need to file an overtime lawsuit, get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Will California Successfully Force Uber and Lyft to Reclassify Drivers as Employers?

In recent news, California seeks to force Uber and Lyft to reclassify its drivers as employees – with a deadline only weeks out! Attorney General Xavier Becerra plans to file court documents that could make it happen. His office plans to seek a preliminary injunction against both massive rideshare companies. If the court agrees, both would be required to grant their drivers’ employment status while the lawsuit is still pending.

Should Rideshare Companies Own Up to Their Responsibilities?

Becerra feels it is time for the two rideshare companies to own up to their responsibilities and take care of the people who make them such a success – their drivers. By misclassifying drivers or other workers as consultants or independent contractors, employers like Uber and Lyft effectively pass responsibility for certain business costs on to their workers. In this scenario, workers or taxpayers end up footing the bill for employer obligations like paying a legal wage, paying overtime, offering sick leave, unemployment insurance, etc.

Do Rideshare Companies Intentionally Misclassify Drivers as Independent Contractors?

Last month, the group sued Uber and Lyft under the state’s gig work law, AB-5 accusing them of miscategorizing drivers as independent contractors. Earlier this month, the state regulator ruled that Uber and Lyft drivers are employees under California law. Regardless, both rideshare conglomerates continuously defended their position that a mandatory reclassification of drivers would negatively impact their business models, cause a price increase, and leave drivers out of work.

Rideshare Companies Insist Drivers Want to be Independent Contractors

According to Uber and Lyft, most rideshare drivers want to be independent contractors. The companies have already made significant changes to their rideshare apps to retain their current business model under California law. Matthew Wing, an Uber spokesperson, even went so far as to call out California’s elected officials for focusing on “shutting down an entire industry” instead of trying to create work for the more than 3 million Californians currently without a job.                                            

If you need to talk to someone about misclassification or if you need to file a misclassification lawsuit, get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.