California Family Rights Act Prevents Employer Interference
San Diego, CA: Under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA), employees of covered employers are eligible for certain job protections, including the ability to take time from work for the birth of a child or the serious health condition of the employee’s child, parent or spouse. When the employee returns to work following the leave, the employee must be given the same or an equivalent job, meaning the employee cannot be fired for taking California CFRA leave - or, for that matter, for taking leave under the Family Medical Leave Act, which is the federal statute protecting employees.
Employers who attempt to prevent an employee from taking his or her CFRA leave could face claims of interference, which occurs when an employer refuses to authorize legitimate CFRA leave, discourages the employee from using the leave, or takes actions to avoid CFRA duties. For example, an employer who decreases an employee’s work hours to make the employee ineligible for leave could be guilty of interference.
In other words, denying leave is itself a violation of CFRA, but so is taking action to ensure the employee is not eligible for that leave in the first place.
Furthermore, employers cannot discriminate against employees or prospective employees for having used or attempted to use their CFRA rights. Employers who use a prospective employee’s assertion of his or her CFRA rights as a reason not to hire that person could be guilty of interference.
“Employers cannot use the taking of CFRA leave as a negative factor in employment actions, such as hiring, promotions or disciplinary actions; nor can CFRA leave be counted against an employee under an employer’s attendance policies,” the regulations state.
Even when employers give other reasons for a job termination, if an employee can prove the firing was likely caused by assertion of CFRA rights, the employee may be able to file a lawsuit. One such suit was filed by Brenda Moore against Century Gaming Management, Inc. (case number B249978), after Moore was fired on the day she returned from CFRA leave. Although she was told she was fired to save costs, the courts found that because she was fired the day she returned from CFRA leave, because she was the only staff person from her department fired, and because her department had, in the previous month, hired six people, she was likely fired in retaliation for taking her leave. The California Court of Appeal ruled in Moore’s favor and reversed a summary judgment in favor of Moore’s employer.
CFRA also prohibits employees from waiving their prospective rights under CFRA and further prohibits employers from inducing employees to waive their rights. This means that employers cannot offer employees other benefits in exchange for waiving their CFRA rights.
Employees who have had their CFRA or FMLA rights interfered with - including having leave denied or being retaliated against for taking leave - may be eligible to file a lawsuit against their employer to enforce their rights and recover any lost wages.
Employers who attempt to prevent an employee from taking his or her CFRA leave could face claims of interference, which occurs when an employer refuses to authorize legitimate CFRA leave, discourages the employee from using the leave, or takes actions to avoid CFRA duties. For example, an employer who decreases an employee’s work hours to make the employee ineligible for leave could be guilty of interference.
In other words, denying leave is itself a violation of CFRA, but so is taking action to ensure the employee is not eligible for that leave in the first place.
Furthermore, employers cannot discriminate against employees or prospective employees for having used or attempted to use their CFRA rights. Employers who use a prospective employee’s assertion of his or her CFRA rights as a reason not to hire that person could be guilty of interference.
“Employers cannot use the taking of CFRA leave as a negative factor in employment actions, such as hiring, promotions or disciplinary actions; nor can CFRA leave be counted against an employee under an employer’s attendance policies,” the regulations state.
Even when employers give other reasons for a job termination, if an employee can prove the firing was likely caused by assertion of CFRA rights, the employee may be able to file a lawsuit. One such suit was filed by Brenda Moore against Century Gaming Management, Inc. (case number B249978), after Moore was fired on the day she returned from CFRA leave. Although she was told she was fired to save costs, the courts found that because she was fired the day she returned from CFRA leave, because she was the only staff person from her department fired, and because her department had, in the previous month, hired six people, she was likely fired in retaliation for taking her leave. The California Court of Appeal ruled in Moore’s favor and reversed a summary judgment in favor of Moore’s employer.
CFRA also prohibits employees from waiving their prospective rights under CFRA and further prohibits employers from inducing employees to waive their rights. This means that employers cannot offer employees other benefits in exchange for waiving their CFRA rights.
Employees who have had their CFRA or FMLA rights interfered with - including having leave denied or being retaliated against for taking leave - may be eligible to file a lawsuit against their employer to enforce their rights and recover any lost wages.
No Comments