Doe v. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

An employee’s discrimination and retaliation claims under the Fair Employment and House Act fail if he presents no evidence that he was subjected to an adverse employment action; an employee’s decision to take a medical leave is not an adverse employment action where he voluntarily took the leave and was paid during the time off. The FEHA was not designed to make workplaces more collegial; its purpose is to eliminate more insidious behavior like discrimination and harassment based on protected characteristics. An employee’s failure to provide his employer with information about the nature and extent of his claimed disabilities is fatal to his interactive process and accommodation claims.

Doe v. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation - filed Nov. 27, 2019, publication ordered Dec. 19, 2019, Fourth District, Div. Two

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 4424

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

Safeway Wage and Hour Cases

An employment task does not become exempt merely because the manager undertakes it in order to contribute to the smooth functioning of the store. While a factfinder must categorize concurrent performance of exempt and nonexempt work based on the manager’s purpose in undertaking the activity, there is no requirement that the concurrent performance of exempt and nonexempt activities must be considered nonexempt.

Safeway Wage and Hour Cases - filed Dec. 18, 2019, Second District, Div. Four

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 4368

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

Mathews v. Happy Valley Conference Center, Inc.

The addition of the word person to Government Code §12940(h) was to ensure that the catch-all retaliation subdivision included all entities covered by the preceding subdivisions; there is no legislative history indicating the Legislature also intended by that addition to allow an employee fired by a religious entity employer to circumvent the religious entity exemption by characterizing the employer as a person for purposes of a retaliation suit. Punitive damages are recoverable for a violation of the whistleblower statute.

Mathews v. Happy Valley Conference Center, Inc. - filed Dec. 12, 2019, Sixth District

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 4252

For more information, go to:

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/

Lehman v. Nelson

An ERISA plan amendment violated the plain language of an existing portion of the plan where the amendment specifically created non-benefit contributions and excluded those non-benefit contributions from the definition of contributions for which contributions would need to be made to a temporarily employed union worker’s home pension fund, and the plan mandated that all contributions received on behalf of temporary workers be transferred to the worker’s home fund.

Lehman v. Nelson - filed Dec. 3, 2019

Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 18-35321

For more information, go to: 

http://www.beverlyhillsemploymentlaw.com/