A district court judge has ruled in favor of an employer who allegedly fired a woman who wanted to use the bathroom to breast-pump. The judge wrote in his opinion that firing someone because of lactation or breast-pumping is not sex discrimination.

The woman’s suit was brought on her behalf by the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, which is common for these types of complaints. She has said that she is shocked by the outcome and will continue to pursue the matter in an appeal.

Advocates say that breastfeeding is a medical condition related to childbirth, and that it does fall under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Breast pumping is often recommended by pediatricians for health benefits to babies. Women who are not able to pump or nurse may risk infection.

The woman in this case says that the president of her company filled her job after discovering that she had requested space in the office to use her breast pump upon returning from maternity leave. She says that management did not provide an opportunity for discussion or compromise, and instead sent her a termination letter stating that she had abandoned her job.

This case is similar to the one we discussed in the last post, in which an employer asserted that the woman’s request for accommodation constituted abandoning her job.

Some states are beginning to enact laws that specifically address this grey area and prevent this type of pregnancy discrimination.

Source: ABC “Judge Backs Firing of Houston Breastpumping Worker” Feb. 8, 2012.

Article source: http://www.neworleansemploymentlawyer.com/2012/02/pregnancy-discrimination-part-two.shtml

The initiative called The Model Alliance is striving to change these difficult and hostile working conditions. The Alliance was launched last week after a former model wanted to improve work conditions for other models. The founder of The Model Alliance says she wants to educate others about the fact that most models are children working in a very grown-up industry. Many of these young women develop eating disorders and other health problems that can significantly affect their emotional and physical well-being.

The Model Alliance is designed to convince models to take more control of their professional lives. Its founder says the women are often treated like a commodity; one beautiful woman can be substituted for another without hesitation from agency representatives.

Although this group is not a union, the founder says she is trying to provide some solidarity and protection for models experiencing workplace harassment or other violations. The group is attempting to draft a Models’ Bill of Rights that includes requirements for informed consent for modeling situations that involve nudity. The document would also prohibit any nude or semi-nude modeling by those younger than 17 and would provide for private dressing areas that photographers would not have access to.

Furthermore, young models would be provided with educational opportunities throughout their early careers, which would also involve the models’ parents. This comprehensive plan has yet to be approved, but The Model Alliance and its associated groups fully support the initiative in order to create a safer, healthier and more respectful

Article source: http://www.sandiegoemploymentlawattorney.com/2012/02/danger-on-the-runway-models-face-harassment-bad-work-conditions.shtml

Among the employee’s claims are that she was subjected to sexual harassment in the workplace, specifically that the probation chief sexually assaulted her and falsely imprisoned her.

According to the 30-year-old’s sexual harassment claims, on one occasion, the probation chief touched her inappropriately several times. She also says he made inappropriate innuendos about a bruise on her body that day.

On another occasion, she says he grabbed her and kissed her and insinuated that they should have sex. The female employee says she attempted to stop the contact but he pulled her shirt down and then sexually assaulted her. She says she repeatedly tried to stop the assault. However, she says she feared retaliation and losing her job so she did not report the incident right away. The next day a similar incident occurred again.

The female victim has been allowed to take a paid leave of absence from her job. This is one appropriate course of action when someone may have been the victim of a sexual assault in order to avoid a continuing hostile work environment.

No employee should feel that they must be subjected to even just one incident of sexual harassment in the workplace for fear of losing their job. If you may be in a similar situation you should know that you have rights, and that sexual harassment in the workplace is illegal, and so is retaliation for reporting it.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle, “Alameda probation chief accused of sexual abuse,” Demian Bulwa, Feb. 15, 2012

Article source: http://www.sanfrancisco-employment-lawyer.com/2012/02/sexual-harassment-charges-brought-against-california-employer.shtml

In the conversation she recorded, the woman asks her employer if the company will fire her for not coming to work when she delivers her baby. Her employer replies that “it’s a voluntary resignation, because you voluntarily aren’t coming here because you’re taking the time to have a baby.”

The employee contacted an attorney who sent contacted the company about the allegations. With the help of her lawyer, the woman was granted leave to have her baby and was able to keep her job.

Other women who have been faced with the same situation have not had as good of an outcome. Accord to the woman’s attorney, the Family Medical Leave Act has some loopholes that allow employers to discard pregnant employees when they are preparing to leave to have their babies. For women who don’t know all of their rights or don’t have access to a lawyer, this means the end of their employment.

The employer has declined to comment on the issue.

In our next post, we’ll look at other current cases dealing with pregnancy discrimination and discuss the legal trends in this area.

Source: ABC “Connecticut Woman Told That Maternity Leave Viewed as Resignation,” Feb. 3, 2012.

Article source: http://www.neworleansemploymentlawyer.com/2012/02/pregnancy-discrimination-part-one.shtml

This decision did not mean that it was okay if Wal-Mart was in fact subjecting its female employees to discriminatory practices, such as paying them less than their male counterparts and failing to grant job promotions in the same manner as they do for males. On the contrary, it simply meant that smaller groups of employees would be required to file such a lawsuit to be heard.

Now, the first among those lawsuits has been brought by the U.S. Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on behalf of 500 current and former female employees of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. from a 5 state region. It is expected that similar such lawsuits will be filed on behalf of female employees from other regions across the United States, including California.

Female employees have the right to work free from sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace. If women are denied pay raises and promotions based on their gender, this is a form of discrimination and makes for a hostile work environment. Though Wal-Mart says it has strict policies against discrimination in the workplace, statistics revealing otherwise may place those policies in question.

Hopefully with the filing of these regional class-action lawsuits representing smaller numbers of female employees, these women, who believe that they have been discriminated against, will have their day in court.

Source: Los Angeles Times, “Female Wal-Mart Employees file sex-discrimination claims,”

Article source: http://www.sanfrancisco-employment-lawyer.com/2012/02/wal-mart-to-face-sexual-discrimination-lawsuits.shtml

David Whitten, partner of Whitten and Lublin, and a workplace bullying expert reviews some of the unfortunate side-effects workplace bullies can have on both the company and the individual in an article in the Globe and Mail.

He explains that the growing number of workplace bullies reported by the Workplace Bullying Institute is likely due to a scarce supply of jobs and promotions in a tough economy, which can often lead to senior executives condoning “hard” management styles.  Whitten offers the following advice:

For the employee – Chronicle your instances of abuse early on with HR and your physician and/or counsellor.

For the employer – Workplace bullies will often target highly skilled employees whom they see as a threat.  This holds the potential to lower productivity, decrease morale, and increase absenteeism and disability claims.

Work towards creating a positive work environment in which individuals feel comfortable coming forward with concerns.  Rather than assume an employee is being “overly-sensitive”, investigate all concerns and make an effort to help the concerned party feel that they are returning to a safe environment.

For more tips on how to manage bullying in the workplace, you can read the full article *here*

Related posts:

1. Toronto Police Officer Fired After Filing Harassment Complaint
2. Starbucks Addresses Homophobia Allegation
3. Miniskirts or Merit: Which Workplace Weapon Will You Choose?
4. Keays v. Honda: SCC ruling a catastrophe for employees
5. Employers must ensure a harassment-free workplace

Tags: advice, David Whitten, Globe and Mail, Harassment in the Workplace, workplace bullyingArticle source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/toronto-employment-lawyer/~3/pZ8gwbYwtTk/bullying-brings-down-employees-and-bottom-lines

If an employee is suddenly fired for no reason, does that mean that the employer broke the law? In some cases, the termination of an employee for no reason is completely legal in California.

In California, employees have the right to quit their jobs at any moment’s notice. But employers also have the legal right to terminate employees at any time, even for reasons that don’t make sense or for reasons that are simply not true.

What is wrongful termination?

If an employee of a San Diego firm or any other business in California is suddenly fired on the spot for no “good” reason, the employee might assume that he or she has a strong case to file a wrongful termination lawsuit. Unfortunately, it could also be a case that is easily dismissed by the court.

In California, wrongful termination does not play a role in an employee’s firing unless the employer fired the employee under the following conditions:

• The employee was a victim of discrimination in the workplace
• The employee complained about illegal practices committed by co-workers or the employer in the workplace
• The employee helped to organize a union or exercised his or her right to vote
• The employee refused to do something that was illegal at the employer’s request
• The employee refused to work in unsafe or unhealthy conditions
• The employee used certain leave rights for an illness, pregnancy or to take care of another family member

If an employee has been fired or believes that he or she has been fired under any of these circumstances, the individual may want to consider speaking with an attorney in order to make sure that his or her rights are protected. Filing a wrongful termination lawsuit may help an employee to get his or her job back, which is extremely important for those who enjoyed their

Article source: http://www.sandiegoemploymentlawattorney.com/2012/02/california-employment-law-issues-what-is-wrongful-termination.shtml

In California it’s illegal for law enforcement agencies to force officers to meet traffic-ticket quotas. Additionally, agencies cannot use the sheer number of tickets issued as the only reason for promoting, demoting, firing or disciplining an officer.

Nevertheless, even though ticket quotas are illegal, the Paso Robles officer says his department expected him to issue a certain number of traffic tickets every month. He says he was threatened with disciplinary action when he failed to meet that quota and, several months later, received a written reprimand for failing to meet “department expectations.”

At that time, the same officer also reportedly learned that he was facing suspension due to a personnel complaint that was made against him.

The officer complained to the city’s human resources department and to his department about being required to meet illegal ticket quotas, but that didn’t get him anywhere. He then went to the court, and court personnel contacted a captain in the Paso Robles police department. The department started an internal investigation.

It was then, he alleges, that his superiors retaliated by denying him promotions and good job assignments, and by spreading false rumors about him.

He is now suing the city of Paso Robles for a number of reasons, including physical, mental and emotional injuries, and the loss of income and health-care expenses.

Source: SanLuisObispo.com, “Paso Robles officer sues over ticket quota claim,” AnnMarie Cornejo, Feb. 4, 2012

Article source: http://www.employmentattorneysanjose.com/2012/02/california-officer-claims-retaliation-for-reporting-illegal-quota.shtml

Religious discrimination in the workplace is defined by a failure to hire or promote based on religion, religious harassment, retaliation, or wrongful termination. This can include discrimination against an employee based on religious dress or forced participation in a religious ritual as a part of employment. In the CDC case, the plaintiff claimed that she was wrongfully terminated for refusing to counsel a woman in a same-sex relationship. The employee allegedly told the client that she was unable to counsel her because of her religious beliefs.

The former employee says she referred the client to another counselor. The CDC claims that they fired the employee because of the manner in which she handled the referral. The record shows that the employee and the CDC discussed the incident and had a disagreement over the best way to handle a religious objection to working with a client. The court rejected her Title VII claim because the CDC offered a reasonable accommodation to her religious beliefs, which the employee rejected. The employee’s lawyers said they are still determining the appropriate next steps.

If you believe that you have been a victim of religious discrimination in the workplace, it’s important to contact an attorney before taking any action against your employer, including quitting your job.

Source: The Daily Report, “11^th circuit rules for CDC in gay counseling case,” Feb. 8, 2012.

Article source: http://www.neworleansemploymentlawyer.com/2012/02/religious-discrimination-claims-against-the-cdc-rejected-by-court.shtml

Recently, California’s 4^th Appellate District Court upheld a lower court’s ruling in awarding a corrections officer more than $820,000. The claim is that the officer was harassed by his co-workers for having a disability, and the county he worked for — Orange County — did nothing to stop the harassment from continuing on.

When looking at the case, the juvenile hall corrections officer was born without fingers and a thumb on his right hand. Being self-conscious of his disability, the man often kept his hand in his pocket. But, it appears that co-workers just used his disability as a way to make fun of him, and even posted comments on a blog where he was called “rat claw boy.” One co-worker even offered another $100 to take a picture of the officer’s hand.

Very upset about what happened — and that his employer did nothing to stop this type of conduct — the officer filed a lawsuit under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Specifically he sued for retaliation, disability discrimination and for the county failing to prevent the harassment.

A lower district court sided with the officer and ordered the county to pay him $500,000 for mental distress, $700 for medical expenses and $320,000 for lost wages.

After the ruling, the county appealed, but did not win. The appeals court determined that the county had ignored the harassment, and that there was even proof that some employees who were harassing the man had even accessed the blog through work computers.

Source: Business Insurance, “Employer liable for employee’s disability harassment by co-workers: Court,” Roberto Ceniceros, Feb. 10, 2012

Article source: http://www.employmentattorneysanjose.com/2012/02/california-officer-awarded-820000-for-disability-discrimination.shtml