In a nutshell, an employer CAN terminate an employee out on approved
sick leave, but may not terminate that person BECAUSE of the leave (as
long as the employee is entitled to that leave, has given reasonable
notice, etc.).  When there is a good faith lay off, its a closer call.
The employer may not count the performance (or lack of it) during the
leave time against the employee. This often arises in commission-only
employment cases.

The second-most common inquiry regarding employee leave status arises
when an employee is out on either private or state “disability”. Many
employees believe that as long as they are qualified for “disability”,
they may not be fired.  This is not correct!. Disability insurance is
between the disability carrier (including state disability) and the
employee. The employer is not involved and need not follow protected
leave requirements simply because an employee is on disability.

If you are on a workman’s compensation absence from work, California
Labor Code 132a prohibits the employer from treating you more harshly
than a non-industrially injured worker and may not discriminate
against you because of your condition. The recent California Supreme
Court case of City of Moorpark vs. Superior Court made clear that
industrially-injured workers are entitled to sue for discrimination
under the California Government Code, along with seeking their
workman’s compensation benefits.  We do not practice workman’s
compensation in all of our offices, but would be happy to refer you to
a local work comp attorney in your area.

As always, this blog is not intended to give legal advise but is
educational in nature only. Seek an experienced attorney in your state
to help with your case.

Reasons for the continuing high level of complaints can be traced to
the still-recovering economy, the escalating cost of living, and the
need for expectant mothers to remain in the workplace longer than
their parents ever needed to. Personally, we’ve seen in our state-wide
offices in California a significant increase in the number of
single-mother households who only have one regular income on which to
support their current (and growing) families. While it may not seem
directly related, many moms are caring for both youngsters and their
own parents, who may actually be living with them.

The federal 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act and state laws such
as California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act protections provide a
first level of support and require qualified employers to offer up to
16 weeks of pregnancy-related leave. Other accommodations may be
required under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

As the Chair of the EEOC, Jacqueline Berrien, said recently,
“Unlawful discrimination should not be among their challenges.”

We practice employment law, including wrongful termination,
harassment, retaliation and whistle blower protection law throughout
California. Call  877 789-9707 for a free consultation anytime. This
blog is educational in nature and you should rely on experienced
attorneys licensed in your jurisdiction for advise on your particular
case. Steve Danz

In California, our Penal Code prohibits extracting written agreements or promises to pay (employee or not) based on the threat of force or fear. Several cases have established that threatening criminal action is reliance on fear. The employer’s good faith belief in whether or not theft occurred is not legally relevant. So, even an employee who has occasionally stolen from an employer may sue for extortion. California specifically recognizes a private cause of action called “Civil Extortion”, and it is based on the requirements of Penal Code 518. If “consent” is obtained by force or fear, then we have extortion. Whether or not money is actually paid is irrelevant.

In a recent case in this office, we had a food establishment falsely claiming theft by servers, followed by their termination and demands for restitution or “criminal prosecution will follow”. We advised each client to revoke the agreements to repay as products of duress and filed suit to void the agreements and for damages for the accompanying slander (termination paperwork said “terminated for theft”) and emotional distress resulting from the demand.

Under the Federal False Claims Act, individuals who report wrongdoing against the government or third parties, are entitled to a share of the proceeds of any settlement or judgment, along with attorney fees. Danz & Associates has represented whistle blowers in many industries, including health care and aerospace, with recoveries to the government in the millions of dollars. Recently passed legislation such as the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act have broadened the avenues for employees to share in financial settlements by their employers. The area of law is highly technical and details count! Consult a qualified attorney while you are still employed so that the proper steps can be taken to preserve your rights.

Susan C.

Stephen Danz & Associates
Employment Attorneys
11661 San Vicente Boulevard
Suite 500
Los Angeles, CA 90049

Dear Steve & Associates,

Thank you for your services as attorney at law in my employment case.I was very pleased with the courtesy and professionalism with which you handled this case in every step from beginning to end

Special thanks to Steve Skoloff for his outstanding performanceduring all phases of the litigation, and specially his exceptional skills in handling the depositions. Also , my special thanks to Shauneen Saebfar, Kathy De La Rosa and Rachel Fishenfeld for their excellence in communication and administrative services.

You will always have my highest regards and recommendation. And, I will always have your information at hand for others we may come across that as us “who should we turn to ?”

Its been a pleasure working with you from the beginning this case to a swift and favourable conclusion. thank you again for your extremely competent and professional services.

Regards,
Armen Abajian,
3290 Dusmere Rd,
Glendale, CA 91206,
aabajian@sbcglobal.net

The bill includes an extension of the time the federal government will subsidize COBRA payments to allow unemployed workers to keep their health insurance from nine months to 15 months. It also fixed a glitch in an earlier unemployment extension bill that should help about 70,000 Michigan workers become eligible for an extension of their benefits.