California Labor Law News
California Labor Law Turns Up the Heat on California Farm Labor Contractors
As reported July 3rd 2009 in US State News, the labor commissioner for the State of California initiated proceedings to revoke the farm labor contractor licenses for Joel Salazar Farm Labor and Valley Pride Inc. after state inspectors witnessed conditions considered dangerous to workers and in violation of state labor statutes.
According to a communiqué issued June 30th by the California Department of Industrial Relations, state inspectors attended a site May 20th of this year and encountered a crew of 15 workers planting date palm trees in 116-degree heat. The workers had less than a single gallon of water for the entire crew.
Regulations require sufficient quantities of fresh drinking water to allow each worker four, 8-ounce glasses per hour??"equivalent to a gallon of water per worker in an 8-hour shift.
Salazar Farm Labor was also cited for failing to provide adequate training to their employees in heat illness prevention.
Valley Pride Inc. was issued an Order Prohibiting Use (OPU) on May 19th when inspectors found two employees toiling in 108-degree weather, without shade. Various other citations were issued for violations ranging from the lack of an injury illness prevention program, to failure to comply with field sanitation requirements.
"This sends yet another strong message to all farm labor contractors statewide," said Commissioner Angela Bradstreet. "If you fail to provide the required level of protection for employees or falsify information on your application you can lose your license."
California became, in 2005 the first state to develop a safety and health regulation addressing heat illness.
That regulation was tested three years later after a 17-year-old farm worker succumbed to heat and died while toiling for Merced Farm Labor. The labor contractor was fined in 2008 for work safety violations and surrendered its license to operate for 3 years, prior to a license revocation hearing.
Three years is the maximum revocation period that can be sought by state regulators under California labor law. California labor employment law represents an important protection for workers in all sectors, ensuring that under California state labor law workers are free from exploitation and risks to their health and wellbeing.
Are Hostile Work Environment Complaints Violations of the California Labor Law?
Unpaid Commissions
"Our company offers nutritional supplements by mail order and their tactics are legally questionable," says Katherine. "We get paid commission on how many customers we 'save' from canceling. When I was hired (October 1, 2008) I was told that I would be paid three dollars a save and was required to make 30 saves a month in order to be employed by the company. Within two weeks of being employed, they changed the minimum saves to 70 a month. They also changed the commission structure so that the employee was making less money. Then on November 1st, with the effective date November 1st, we received a memo changing the commission structure again where we would make less money; this happened two more times. Several of my co-workers lost hundreds of dollars in commission thanks to them changing the commission structure at the end of the month and backdating it to the beginning of them month.
We are also written up randomly even if we make their '70 saves' goal. I made 72 saves last month and was written up (and threatened with termination) for poor performance with my saves even though I met their written guidelines for how many saves were expected of me every month."
In the case Nein v. Hostpro, Inc.. filed 6/3/09 in the Court of Appeal in the State of California, the defendant argued that although commissions are wages under the Labor Code, contractual terms authorizing the commissions must be established before the wages are due. Katherine should study her contract: commission agreements need be carefully analyzed and drafted to maximize the likelihood that a court will uphold the language on which the employer bases its decisions regarding commission payments.
"We are often accused of things we did not do or threatened to be fired if we do not admit to them," says Katherine. " For example, someone left a note on my supervisor's desk. In order to find out who wrote the note, management called several employees they didn't like one by one into their office and accused them of writing the note. They threatened to fire them if they didn't admit to writing the note. This is just one of several things they've done to harass us."
Meal and Rest Breaks
"We are denied pay if we 'forget' to clock in from lunch and work for the hours," says Katherine. "It doesn't matter if the time clock malfunctions or not, they refuse to pay you for the hours you work. I have a memo from HR that states this. They will give people who they don't like "late" lunches. We work 8-5pm. If management does not like you, they will schedule your lunch at 3pm-4pm."
Employees must get a 10-minute break for every four hours worked provided that the work day is at least five hours long, and a 30 minute meal break if the workday is 6 hours or more.
In the State of California, employees can sue for violations of meal and rest break provisions going back a period of three years. In addition, it is likely that employees would be able to go back a total of four years under unfair competition laws. Previously, the DLSE ("California Labor Board") had restricted the claims to only a one year period. (During a five hour work day, an employee is required to receive a 30 minute break. During a ten-hour work day, an employee is required to receive two 30 minute breaks.)
Katherine says that she and several of her co-workers are losing thousands of dollars in commission due to their employer "backdating" the new commission structure. She adds that "management is clearly harassing several employees and myself, creating a hostile work environment. I have several employees who will come forward to attest to this. I also have work memos, copies of write-ups, and the employee handbook." Katherine is now seeking legal help.
California Labor Law: Stand Up for Your Rights Sooner than Later
David's main complaint is not being paid overtime. He worked in the computer IT department and all techies were covered under a union contract??"that excluded technicians' classification for overtime pay. "We belonged to a union that was covering the airline mechanics and we were part of that same contract," says David. "We were called 'remote terminal maintainers' back in 1979 and it wasn't until years later that the company changed it to 'computer terminal technicians'. Changing the name was more descriptive of what we did, even though it was lacking.
We did tech computer maintenance from the PC, the network, infrastructure and associated hardware. This work was supposed to be based on an 8-hour shift but one year we finally made a verbal complaint to our regional manager that we were not being paid overtime. The owners of the company came to a meeting with the techies and the president of the local union. We were told by the company that it was not a company issue; it was a collective bargaining issue. The union president said at the meeting that we were excluded on the overtime issue from the union contract. 'You are either under the company rules or the state guidelines,' he said, 'and you can go for relief in the courts.'
The regional manager's eyes popped out when he heard that. Years have passed and we tried to fight this issue many times, to bring it up with the company. We had pushed at union meetings for the techs to be included in overtime pay. The union negotiated an agreement but at that time everyone else who was classified under that contract could only get paid time and a half. Prior to that, in that same contract, everyone but 2 classifications was paid time and a half and double time, except the techs and the ground radio techies.
Most techs in my department thought we might be outsourced if we were paid overtime. In 2006 that eventually happened. It was very traumatic for all of us??"I estimate that 150 techs lost their jobs nationwide. The managers, supervisors and regional manager??"everyone below the director??"lost their jobs. The whole department was outsourced to a Texas company, who subcontracted a lot of work to another company whose pay was less than half our pay.
We could have sued the union for not representing us properly but most people who tried to fight the company or bring about some type of complaint were forced??"somehow??"out of their jobs. So why didn't we fight? Nobody wanted to go through all the aggravation and the stress you are put through standing up for your rights in a hostile environment…
There was a lot of favoritism for certain individuals and in my opinion they would not join a lawsuit because they benefited most for not doing so. Others felt they were wronged but were too afraid and didn't want the pressure. We (numerous techies from several states) tried to fight in our own way: by trying to get management above us to get us better pay conditions; contacting the union to fight for us and hoping someone in our tech classification would file a lawsuit. We were hoping that someone more independent could file.
What I know now, I would have filed a suit. At that time, the environment we worked in was very hostile. They were very discriminatory in promotions and work assignments and in my opinion they violated the contracted agreement along with several California labor laws. In retrospect, we should have had a labor lawyer representing us."
California Labor Law Teeth Worth $13.5 Million
At issue is the conduct of two janitorial cleaning enterprises that were accused of evading payroll taxes, together with a failure to pay minimum wage and overtime to about 300 janitorial workers in California.
An investigation by the office of the California State Labor Commissioner revealed that workers were routinely required to work in excess of eight hours in a day, seven days per week at a flat rate of $50 per day.
Excell Cleaning and Building Services Inc. of Delaware and M.O. Restaurant Cleaning of California Inc. were assessed judgments totaling in excess of $13.5 million in a case fostered by state Labor Commissioner Angela Bradstreet and California Attorney General Edmund Brown.
"We are pleased that the court has awarded the workers their rightful wages owed, along with penalties and liquidated damages," said Labor Commissioner Angela Bradstreet. "Our coordinated effort with the Attorney General to take action against these companies sends a zero tolerance message to all California businesses that they need to play by the rules."
It was alleged that workers were also misclassified as independent contactors, allowing the two corporations to avoid paying a quarter of a million dollars in payroll taxes. Given the sorry condition of the California state economy at the moment, that's $250,000 the state would like to have in its coffers.
It has been reported that the two companies at the center of the lawsuit failed to appear, thus the court entered a default in the action. On March 15th of this year the Honorable Marvin M. Lager in Los Angeles Superior Court granted the Plaintiff's application for default and issued the judgment of $13,640,819 for wages owed, penalties for wage violations, penalties for unfair business practice violations and liquidated damages.
"As Labor Commissioner, my top priorities include protecting workers and targeting these kinds of companies that operate in the underground economy," said Bradstreet. "These illegal operations undercut legitimate businesses and are damaging to our state's economy."
The two defendant companies had contracts to supply janitorial services at various restaurants in Los Angeles, San Diego and Orange counties. By working their charges over 7 straight days for such a low stipend without provision for overtime benefits, basic workers' rights were sorely violated. Issues such as health and time spent with family would be problematic in view of the hours involved.
Such a violation of California labor laws suggests a blatant disregard for California state labor law, but also for basic human rights. As shown here, California labor employment law exists to protect worker's rights in the state. Violations are not taken lightly. If you, or a co-worker have evidence of these types of violations, it would be prudent to discuss the matter with a qualified attorney.
Bounced Checks don't bode well with California Labor Law
"Our checks are always short," says Eddie. "Recently one paycheck I got was short $300??"that's around 7 or 8 hours of work--and my co-worker was shorted 15 hours just last week. We keep asking the boss if everything is OK and he assures us that everything is fine; that we are just in a crisis right now due to this recession." But even in these hard economic times, employers can still be fined if they violate California labor employment laws.
Eddie is a motorcycle mechanic and works on commission only, but he has a choice: he can either get paid minimum wage or commission??"whichever is greater. However, he should be getting an hourly wage because he provides his own tools. "The last place I worked at was fined for not giving the commission technicians their minimum wage," Eddie says. "That was in 1999 and our minimum wage was $19 per hour. One of my co-workers looked up our wage this year and it is anywhere from $18 to $23, depending upon how long you have been in the industry.
"I think my current employer should also be fined and penalized for not complying with the California labor laws. We have talked to him about this issue and he just says 'Don't worry' or he will blame it on his CPA??"the accountant who does our payroll. But this has been going on since last October when he fired everyone in HR. This company employed 134 workers but now we are down to 40 employees. Ninety people have been laid off due to the economy. We are holding on with a skeleton staff??"they look at us as commission technicians and if work doesn't come in, we don't get paid. I also know co-workers in the parts department who have gone 3 months without their bonus checks; nobody knows how long they can hold on for.
Sometimes we've gone home with 40 hours of pay for a two-week period and a lot of the time we are here 6 days a week waiting for someone to bring their bike in for repair. We are supposed to get paid idle time if nothing comes in but that's not getting paid. We are also supposed to get paid if we clean up the shop or do any maintenance in the shop??"of course we don't get paid for that either.
Two brothers own this corporation. One of the owners came by and let us know last Friday that they were giving up on two of the brands??"Suzuki and BRP. This means that we have two less brands to work on??"the future of my job is looking pretty bleak.
Last month the owners were supposed to give us 30 days notice of any payday change. They never did. The California labor law states that within 30 days prior to a payday change, the employer is supposed to post the new payday change in a prominent location where everyone can see it.
If it is money the owners need to pay, they'll hide from you. My boss is constantly hunting them down. Apparently it is hard to find the owners because they switched offices in another location and we don't even have their phone number. The only way to get in touch with them is through our boss who will email the owners and then he has to wait for a reply.
I'm not the smartest guy in the industry but right now I have a way out??"I have another job lined up. So I'm just waiting to find out if my next check bounces. It doesn't make sense that our checks bounce because we get paid from commission??"if we make $30 per hour, the owners are making $45 per hour. They make good money off us??"it's not that they don't have the money to pay us--they are just bad business people.
Our next step is to file a complaint with the California state labor board and then seek legal help."
California Labor Law Violation: Workers Exploited
It appears as if justice will prevail for employees holding the job titles of Systems Integrators and Graphics System Validation Engineers, after their action against Intel has been granted class certification status in Superior Court of California, County Santa Clara.
Intel is the world's largest manufacturer of semiconductor chips for the computer industry. And yet, even given that status it appears to be not above the alleged practice of misclassifying employees with the intent to freeze them out from receiving the overtime pay they are owed.
While the granting of class action status cannot be seen as a ruling on the merits of the case, insiders report that the plaintiffs are one step closer to potentially claiming back overtime pay and other related costs.
There are strict provisions in California labor law governing the computer IT industry and software engineers in particular, with overtime considered exempt with regard to certain job classifications and work that is performed.
Companies that employ software engineers and computer professionals have been known to bend the rules and play fast and loose with classification parameters, in an effort to avoid paying overtime and thereby reducing costs. However, computer IT professionals work hard enough without giving up extra pay that is their due. Many are fighting back through lawsuits.
Meanwhile the California State Labor Commissioner has yanked the carpet out from under a California provider of flooring. All Floor Commercial and Residential Flooring and its owner have been frozen out of participating in public tenders for 3 years after serious violations of public works laws were found, together with a 'clear intent of fraud.'
The list of alleged misdeeds, which are presumed given the State's position, is a sorry example of how an employer is capable of taking advantage of employees who are probably impoverished to begin with.
Among the allegations and evidence uncovered during work completed by the company in 2007 and 2008:
Failure to pay proper prevailing wage rates; Misclassification of workers; Failure to pay travel and mileage reimbursements; Falsification of certified payroll records; Falsely reported work hours of employees.
The investigation also revealed that the contractor maintained two separate sets of books in which they falsely reported dates, hours and projects on which employees worked. The contractor was also found to routinely misclassify employees as lower-paid laborers to avoid paying the higher wage. In some cases the workers were paid less then half the required prevailing wage for their true classification.
As a result of the investigation and evidence found, the Labor Commissioner issued an Order of Debarment against the firm.
"The debarment proceedings are necessary to remove employers operating in an illegal manner at taxpayer expense and to the detriment of employees on public works projects," said California Labor Commissioner Angela Bradstreet. "The action that I am taking will help to create a level playing field for legitimate employers operating in this tough economic time.
"Our investigation revealed serious violations of the public works laws and a clear intent of fraud against employees and the awarding bodies on two separate projects," Bradstreet continued. "I cannot allow a company to continue operating while deliberately taking advantage of their employees and the tax payers who fund these public works projects."
While it is a sad state of affairs to witness such blatant violations of workers' rights and California labor laws??"especially in the midst of one of the toughest economies in decades??"it is heartening to know that California state labor law is defended and upheld on behalf of workers made to suffer from unscrupulous employers that have little regard for California labor employment law. If you know of, or suspect, such a violation in your own workplace, don't take the abuse. Fight it, with the help of an attorney.
Housekeeper Made to Jump Through Hoops in Basketball Star's Home
Such is the case with Maria Jimenez, the former housekeeper for NBA basketball star Kobe Bryant. Jimenez filed a lawsuit last week in Orange County Superior Court alleging that she was "harassed and humiliated" while on the job. The plaintiff also alleges that she was denied health insurance and was ultimately forced to quit her job due to "intolerable" working conditions.
Working in someone's home may present a more intimate stetting than working in a large corporation, but California labor law applies nonetheless.
In court papers filed earlier this month, Jimenez alleges that she was promised health insurance when she was hired, but realized too late that the promised coverage had not been secured on her behalf after she incurred more than $127,000 in medical bills for a back injury, and surgery to remove an ovarian cyst.
The 48-year-old former housekeeper also alleges in court documents that she is owed more than $20,000 in earnings that have been wrongfully withheld, together with unpaid overtime. She argues there should also be penalties for not being paid properly.
The most sensational aspect of the case, however, remains the alleged abuse suffered by Jimenez while on the job in the Bryant household, in which she worked from September 2007 to March of 2008??"a tenure of just six months.
From the time she began her employment at the Bryant home, Jimenez alleges that she was "badgered, harassed and humiliated" by Vanessa Bryant??"the basketball star's wife??"behavior that continued until Jimenez finally found the situation to be intolerable and quit.
The former housekeeper alleges that she was harassed by Vanessa Bryant in front of Kobe Bryant, the couple's children, and others. According to court documents "Vanessa began a continuing pattern of verbally abusing and demeaning (Jimenez)," and the plaintiff claims she was called lazy, slow, dumb, a liar and was cursed and screamed at.
When Jimenez finally approached Kobe Bryant about quitting the basketball star is said to have talked her out of it and elicited an apology from his wife, court papers said. But then, the plaintiff said, the abuse began again.
According to court papers Vanessa Bryant screamed at Jimenez for putting an expensive blouse, worth $690 in the clothes washer, then directed Jimenez to retrieve the price tag from a jar containing dog feces with her bare hand. When Jimenez finally gave notice, Vanessa Bryant allegedly insisted that Jimenez continue to work until her next payday in order to cover the cost of the blouse, which Jimenez said she did.
The Jimenez lawsuit claims that working conditions in the home were intolerable, and that the situation constituted a violation of California labor laws that protect workers from being forced to toil in unhealthy situations.
The action seeks unspecified general, punitive and special damages, as well as back pay and the overtime Jimenez says she is owed.
Managers Exploited under California Labor Law
The gray area lies here: What separates exempt from non-exempt seems to be the level of responsibility. "At times I did supervise staff," says Bill. "On any given workday, I spent one hour actually performing strictly management responsibilities such as planning and organizing activities and setting work schedules. And sometimes customers wanted to see the manager so I fulfilled that role. But in a 10-hour workday, definitely 8 hours were spent performing hourly worker's job duties, and nothing remotely managerial. Being on the floor and helping customers with questions could be classified as managerial but it amounted to about a 15-second conversation.
This is generally the basis of my overtime concern. On researching the California overtime law, if a worker spends more than 50 percent of their time performing hourly work duties, then they should be paid overtime. But the gray area is the level of responsibility that a general manager or store manager has??"it is basically just by title. In other words, this position, especially when it comes to retail, is classified as exempt based on job title rather than duties.
Here is another example: my store had to perform a timesheet audit for all the associates for an entire year. When my district manager assigned the task to me, he said it was because ' I was free labor.' I didn't say much because I didn't want to lose my job. But he said it in front of an assistant manager (I was the manager) and I didn't want to be insubordinate??"I just took it. I was so used to that type of environment--where we basically picked up any hours that were needed.
As a group of store managers, we discussed overtime compensation at district meetings but we were told 'That is just the way it is,' and the expectation is that we work a minimum of 50 hours per week. As general managers, we must meet certain goals and objectives to keep our jobs. The upper management gives us a payroll figure or percent that makes it extremely difficult to operate on a daily basis all the requirements that the company sets forth. So in order for us to meet those goals and objectives, store managers need to work excessive hours in order to keep their jobs.
And it is even more prevalent given this economic climate because payroll is the easiest expense to cut.
I calculated that if I were paid an hourly wage with overtime (time and a half after 8 hours) I would make a lot more than my salaried wage. It turned out to be in the six figures, substantially less than I was getting paid.
I have been talking to an attorney and he agrees with me that I certainly performed more hourly functions each day than managerial functions, but based upon present labor laws, by my title and in the course of the day that I performed supervisory functions, it would be difficult to win the case.
I know that assistant managers have been awarded back pay in overtime and are now paid hourly as opposed to salary. Store managers are still being exploited. The California labor laws would have to be changed, starting with state legislature. I think everyone agrees that it is an abuse, but with the present labor laws I couldn't win in a courtroom.
This incident has taught me to be cautious: if I take on another salaried position as manager, I would look more deeply at the store environment, my job duties and number of associates available to perform daily functions."
California Labor Law Violations—Triple Whammy
Daniel has an exemplary employment record: he worked as a police officer for 10 years before changing careers??"he went to nursing school, graduated at the top of his class and got a job at a California medical center as a clinical review nurse.
He worked for a 18 months at Blue Shield as an Appeals and Grievance nurse. "At that time the department was first setting up and I was the 'go-to' man," says Daniel. " I received bonus awards and other department heads said I was excelling at my work. I did so well that the director asked if I would move into the quality department and do investigative work??"for members who had complaints against their doctors for quality of care, who were denied certain kinds of care, etc.
I had many responsibilities and I loved my work, until we had a management change. The new manager didn't like my work. I was constantly harassed by her and got depressed; I went on medical leave and eventually lost my job. Meanwhile I discovered that I wasn't getting paid the same amount of pay as my co-workers; they were also receiving fringe benefits that I wasn't getting such as a flexible work schedule.
We were all exempt and they were trying to put me on a schedule. As an exempt employee we were allowed certain freedoms that the hourly employees were not entitled to. As well, my female co-worker was new and inexperienced and was getting paid a lot more than me, and I trained her.
I think I was discriminated against because I am gay or it could be because I am male. For example, this new medical director called me into her office one day and said, 'You are challenged'. I assumed she meant knowledgably challenged in my work. She also said I didn't know how to write and that I was constantly late with my work. Nothing could have been further from the truth. This was very shocking and demoralizing.
She treated me like this constantly. I put up with her abuse for almost a year but my mental state was getting worse, to the point where I was dreading coming in to work--I had no choice, I needed my paycheck and I wasn't in the right head space to find another job.
I also reported the director to HR. They told her to give me the opportunity to take time off and do a performance improvement revue of my work. That got her even angrier and one day I just had a breakdown at work.
My unit manager and medical director called me into her office: they told me that my work was insufficient and they didn't like anything I did. I had a panic attack. I went back to my desk and couldn't breathe; then I got up, walked out the door and didn't return.
This happened at the beginning of 2008; I also filed with the EEOC; they sent a letter to Blue Shield saying the company has been charged with discrimination, retaliation and violation of the FLSA act. So far nothing has happened with government agencies so I decided to seek legal help.
I got another job six months later as the manager of quality management at the AIDS Health Care foundation. I didn't have any employees to supervise, it was essentially a title, but I was exempt so I was paid a salary. I worked almost every weekend and evenings??"in excess of 60 hours a week.
I started to get sick and depressed again??"I got the same symptoms back. I asked my supervisor for 2 days off but she denied me and stated, 'We don't owe you a living'. I am the hardest worker they had, I just don't get it. So I resigned.
I started this job at the end of April last year and worked until the beginning of February 2009; during that entire time there were only 4 weekends that I didn't work, so they owe me a substantial amount of overtime. I was the only person in this department so I had nobody to supervise. Why was I classified as exempt? I believe it was to avoid paying overtime."
Daniel has really been through the wringer with these two jobs. He is currently unemployed and in debt but looking for work in managed care or sales. And he is seeking legal help rather than wait for federal agencies to deal with these three California Labor Law violations.
Wrongfully Terminated, Contrary to California Labor Law
According to Anthony, this is what happened.
"It was 3.45 pm and I was getting off my shift in 15 minutes," Anthony says. "I worked in the electronics department with Amy (not her real name) and the department supervisor. Amy needed the keys to open the display case for a customer so I threw a lanyard (that the keys clip onto) on top of a glass display case in front of her. She said I threw the keys in her face and complained to my manager??"he was in the back of the store and didn't see this incident.
Amy never came back to our department and still had the keys on the lanyard around her neck. Instead she went to guest services and started talking to another co-worker.
I can't leave; my shift ends in 2 minutes and I have customers waiting for service. And I can't open up any of the display cases. I called Amy on the walkie-talkie and asked her politely to return the keys. Instead, she ignored me.
Now I am in a quandary: nobody is allowed to work overtime because of budget cuts and if I don't clock out at 4pm I can get written up.
I asked the customers to please wait; I clocked out and literally ran to get the keys from the front desk??"where Amy left them. I am now off the clock but I came back to electronics and helped those people who were patiently waiting for service. I started to ring up a purchase but my supervisor finished my transaction. As I was leaving the department, Amy approached me.
She got in my face??"she stepped in front of me and raised her voice.' I don't appreciate you talking to me the way you do, or throwing keys in my face,' she said. I didn't reply; I just walked away.
As I walked away, she yelled in front of customers, 'That's right, walk away like you and your little bitch-ass sister.' My department supervisor heard every word. I told her to keep my sister out of it and kept walking. (My sister is a department supervisor next door at Babies R Us and she was Amy's boss at one time.)
I walked to the back of the store to tell my manager what happened and he said, 'OK, I will handle it'.
They gave me the next two weekends off and Amy had one week off while they were investigating the situation. I was never asked for a statement, nor did I receive a phone call stating that I wasn't on the schedule that week. I had to find out from a co-worker. On January 25 I called to find out my next shift and another employee told me I wasn't on the schedule. I called back January 27 to speak with Bob, the manager. Bob said he would call me back??"he never called.
I called the next day and spoke with another manager; he said he was busy and would call me back. Guess what??"no call back. On January 29th, I spoke with Bob again. He told me to work a shift on January 31 at 4pm. Instead of working, I was hauled into the office and terminated by Bob and another manager. They told me to take off my uniform and badge; I walked out of the office and I was done. Nothing to sign, no good-byes…
Their reason for firing me was that they couldn't have another incident like this happen again. They asked for my supervisor's statement, my sister's statement, and Amy's statement, but they never asked me for a statement. It was one-sided.
Not only was I wrongfully terminated; I also feel discriminated against. Amy sold more instant credits, so maybe they thought she was a better worker. We were both seasonal employees but both of us had made the cut to stay on for the rest of the year, so this was quite a blow to me??"I have nothing else to fall back on. With the economy the way it is, I am still looking for work and probably don't qualify for unemployment insurance.
And another thing: The day I was fired, I was given my final paycheck but it was short 2 hours of pay. I was owed for an 8-hour and a 4-hour shift but they only paid me 10 hours. I didn't open my check until I left the building. I called back, requesting documentation of my termination. HR said she would call me back the next day."
You guessed right, Anthony never got a return call. This is an appalling way to treat employees, particularly an 18-year-old's first job. Fortunately, the California Labor Law is in place to protect employees from wrongful termination and discrimination.
Anthony believes this company owes him and his sister an apology, two hours of pay, and his job back??"at the very least.
About . TOS . Privacy . Disclaimer . Contact . Advertise . Member Login
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License ©2026 Online Legal Media. All rights reserved.
Visit other Online Legal Media Websites:
