Harassment News
Another Tale of Two California Harassment Lawsuits
San Francisco, CA: A California harassment lawsuit has been filed against a janitorial contractor based in Gilroy over allegations of sexual harassment against a female employee by a supervisor. The lawsuit contends that M.A Jones Inc., which also does business as Cleaning Services, did nothing about the harassment allegations, then fired the plaintiff when she reported the behavior. Meanwhile, a separate harassment lawsuit ended in July with a multimillion-dollar verdict in favor of the plaintiff.
The Contra Costa Times (9/30/15) reports the latest lawsuit involves plaintiff Virginia Medina, who worked for M.A. Jones Inc. Medina claims that a supervisor made sexually explicit comments to her, and at one point escorted her to an isolated area where the supervisor attempted to initiate sexual activity, or so it is alleged.
When Medina rebuffed the supervisor’s advances and reported the alleged activity to the defendant’s leadership team, the plaintiff alleges there was no response. She was fired from her position three months later, and alleges the termination was due to her rebuff of her supervisor’s advances and subsequent reporting of the alleged harassment.
The lawsuit has been filed by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging various violations to US federal laws which require that an employer “take effective and immediate action” in such situations, said William Tamayo, the agency’s San Francisco district director, in comments published in the Contra Costa Times. “[Our agency] cannot accomplish its mission of equal employment opportunity unless workers feel secure in their right to speak out against discrimination without the fear of retaliation.”
Medina is of Mexican descent. An attempt to reach a settlement was not successful. The lawsuit was brought to San Jose’s division of the US District Court for the Northern District of California.
Meanwhile, a California harassment and discrimination lawsuit that resulted in an $8.7 million jury award in favor of the plaintiff in July was in the news again earlier this month after defendant Rite Aid Corp. was ordered to pay $1 million in attorney’s fees. The case is Robert Leggins v. Rite Aid Corp., case number BC511139, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.
The original California harassment lawsuit was brought by plaintiff Robert Leggins, who worked as a store manager at Rite Aid. Following a robbery attempt during which Leggins was injured, the plaintiff alleges he was harassed and accused of shirking his responsibilities in light of an injury that required several surgical procedures to remedy. Even while recovering, it is alleged that supervisors required him to perform hard manual labor, and mocked him for his injury and his race. Leggins had worked at the Rite Aid since 1985 and was a long-standing employee.
In July a jury dismissed allegations of discrimination, but found for the plaintiff on allegations of harassment and undue punishment. Leggins was awarded $3.7 million for lost wages and other losses, together with $5 million in punitive damages in the California harassment lawsuit.
A Tale of Two California Harassment Lawsuits
One of the California harassment lawsuits involves two female graduate students who have filed suit against UCLA, alleging that officials with the university failed to act on complaints of sexual harassment against a history professor. The plaintiffs are Nefertiti Takla and Kristen Hillaire Glasgow. The two women claim in court documents that they have endured emotional distress and are fearful that the whole situation has damaged their studies. They are also, according to a published report in the Los Angeles Times (6/16/15), fearful of returning to the UCLA campus.
The plaintiffs claim in their lawsuit that university officials, when apprised of allegations involving suggestive comments and unwanted advances, urged the two women to keep mum on the subject and refrain from pursuing formal investigations.
The harassment lawsuit holds that the accused began harassing plaintiff Glasgow in 2008, and that the harassment continued until 2013. Plaintiff Takla also alleges sexual harassment. The lawsuit, filed in June, names as defendants the regents of the University of California. The case is Nefertiti Takla and Kristen Hillaire Glasgow, Plaintiffs, vs. The Regents of the University of California, Case No. 2:15-cv-4418, US District Court, Central District of California, Western Division.
A separate California harassment lawsuit was filed last month in Orange County Superior Court against Cypress College. In their lawsuit, plaintiffs Gabriela Rodas and Porcia Ruiz allege sexual harassment at the hands of a Spanish teacher in 2013. According to the Orange County Register (8/6/15), when the plaintiffs complained to college officials about verbal and physical harassment, they were told that the teacher “has his rights,” according to the report.
The California harassment lawsuit alleges the accused would compliment the women on their clothing. But the accused would also repeatedly touch the plaintiff’s arms and backs, and gaze at their bodies in a sexually suggestive manner. The accused is alleged to have said that he wanted to tell them more but couldn’t because he “would get in trouble because it was inappropriate,” according to the suit.
At one point, the accused embraced one of the women in a bear hug from behind and allegedly touched her breasts and chest, the suit claims. The plaintiffs claim that when they reported this alleged behavior to a dean, they were told that little could be done: “My hands are tied,” is alleged to have been the reply. It is alleged in the California Harassment lawsuit that the same college dean later telephoned one of the plaintiffs and informed her that district administrators had considered transferring her to another school because the accused “has his rights.” The plaintiff’s reply: “What about MY rights?”
The Harassment lawsuit was filed in North Orange County Superior Court in August. Defendants named include Cypress College and the North Orange County Community College District. The lawsuit is Gabriela Rodas, et al v. Cypress College, et al, Case No. 8:2015-cv-00062.
Walmart Faces Criticism in Dispute with Employees in California
According to the Los Angeles Times (11/19/13), the National Labor Relations Board found Walmart acted unlawfully in dealing with employees who threatened to strike on Black Friday in 2012. The company reportedly threatened discipline against employees who took part in the strikes and took unlawful action against workers who did take part in the job action.
As a result of the National Labor Relations Board’s findings, Walmart may have to provide back pay to employees and reinstate some workers. The New York Post (11/18/13) reports that the National Labor Relations Board could sue Walmart over the company’s actions, which reportedly included firing 117 employees. A lawsuit could be filed if Walmart does not settle with employees.
The National Labor Relations Board issued a statement (11/18/13) noting that while it found merit to some of the complaints, it found no merit to others. Among the charges that it did not find merit with were complaints that employees were told to move off Walmart property and complaints that Walmart unlawfully changed work schedules.
But other complaints had merit, the board found, including that Walmart stores in California and other states “unlawfully threatened, surveilled, disciplined, and/or terminated employees in anticipation of or in response to employees’ other protected concerted activities,” and “unlawfully threatened, disciplined, and/or terminated employees for having engaged in legally protected strikes and protests.”
Meanwhile, Yelp faces a class-action lawsuit in California alleging the people who write reviews for the website should be paid because the company could not continue without them. Yelp offers reviews on a wide range of businesses including restaurants, law firms and hairdressers.
According to the lawsuit, Yelp reaches 108 million people per month, with more than 42 million reviews. Profits come from advertising that is sold on the site. “The practice of classifying employees as ‘reviewers’ or ‘Yelpers’ or ‘Elites’ or ‘independent contractors’ or ‘interns’ or ‘volunteers’ or ‘contributors’ to avoid paying wages is prohibited by federal law, which requires employers to pay all workers who provide material benefit to their employer, at least the minimum wage.” The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Central District of California.
Salvation Army Faces California Labor Lawsuit
According to court documents, Kimberlea Rea is employed as a bookkeeper/human resources assistant by The Salvation Army at the Modesto Citadel and has been since March 2006. Her job reviews have been favorable, including praise for being “a valuable employee.”
But the lawsuit alleges that one of The Salvation Army’s captains began approaching Rea and asking for her home address. Despite her refusing to give her address, she later saw the captain driving by her home. Eventually, he began asking for hugs and kisses on the cheek, leering at her body and telling her she “looked hot.” The situation allegedly escalated to the point where the captain talked to Rea about his sex life, inappropriately touched her and followed her around the office.
During December 2012, the lawsuit alleges, Rea complained to supervisors about issues with the captain, but the captain was not moved to a different location and no action was initially taken against the captain. In February 2013, after further alleged instances of harassment, the captain was moved to a different section of The Salvation Army. At the time, Rea noted that she was experiencing humiliation, degradation, embarrassment and sleeplessness as a result of the captain’s actions.
Rea was reportedly told by The Salvation Army that some of her complaints were supported by its investigation and that she was not found to be responsible for the captain’s behavior. But the lawsuit alleges Rea was never given a public apology from The Salvation Army, nor were her claims ever publicly acknowledged. She was also reportedly told by The Salvation Army that they would prefer she simply leave her position with them. Furthermore, according to the lawsuit, The Salvation Army’s policy regarding the captain’s conduct was zero tolerance, which meant the captain should have been fired for his actions. Instead, The Salvation Army publicly called his transfer a reward for a “job well done.”
“TSA [The Salvation Army] never provided Rea with a written confirmation of its findings or what actions would be taken to prevent future harassment from occurring,” the lawsuit states. “Rea concluded TSA wanted to merely appease Rea while maintaining a public persona that there was no problem within TSA concerning sexual harassment.”
Following Rea’s complaints and the captain’s transfer, Rea has reportedly been subjected to critical comments and remarks about her job performance.
The lawsuit seeks damages of $1 million, as well as compensatory damages.
Female California Agriculture Workers Exposed to Harassment, Assault
Issues of harassment in the US agriculture industry were reported on by FRONTLINE, Univision, the Investigative Reporting Program at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism and the Center for Investigative Reporting. The report, titled Rape in the Fields, aired on PBS on June 25, 2013. The report cites national statistics, but California reportedly has the highest number of agricultural workers in the US and several incidents of alleged harassment in California were included in the documentary.
The report cites a 2010 UC Santa Cruz study that involved 150 female farmworkers. Of those, almost 40 percent experienced sexual harassment, which ranged from verbal harassment to rape, and 24 percent said they were sexually coerced by a supervisor. The study, titled “Examining the Sexual Harassment Experiences of Mexican Immigrant Farmworking Women” (9/22/10), notes that of approximately one million farmworkers in California, 28 percent are women. It further reports that between 35 and 50 percent of women are sexually harassed at some point in their career.
But because they need the work, because many are illegal immigrants or because they are afraid of retaliation, many instances of harassment go unreported. Many may also not realize that harassment on the job is illegal.
Harassment on the job is illegal, as is retaliation for filing a complaint about harassment. In the first sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against a grower to go to court (the case of Olivia Tamayo, who alleged she was raped three times by a supervisor) in 2004, a jury found Harris Farms - Tamayo’s employer - liable for its supervisor’s sexual harassment and retaliation, and awarded Tamayo approximately $800,000 (as reported in Rape in the Fields).
According to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, it is illegal to harass a person because of their sex. This includes sexual harassment, unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal or physical harassment. If an employee complains about harassment, it is illegal for the employer to retaliate against the employee. Sexual harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which applies to employers with 15 or more employees. Violations of sexual harassment laws can result in a lawsuit filed against the individual accused of committing the harassment and his or her employers.
When Is Verbal Abuse a Violation of the California Labor Law?
It all started because Justin had to go to the bathroom. He knew the drill: try to contact the boss first and, failing that, pack up his station before leaving. “I called my boss to see if I could get a replacement but after three attempts, including texting, I gave up. I packed everything away then shut down my stand,” says Jason. “I was gone for about ten minutes. When I returned, a man was standing at my station and asked if I was Justin. Affirmative. Then he started freaking out, yelling at me that I couldn’t leave my stand, no matter how bad an emergency.”
The man yelling at Justin was Costco’s “Loss and Prevention” employee, like a security guard who was mainly employed to prevent shoplifting. He certainly didn’t have the right to tell Justin that he wasn’t allowed to go to the bathroom.
“This guy was getting louder and louder as I tried to remain calm,” Justin explains. “I said, ‘Sir, I know that verbal abuse is in violation of the California labor code and you have no right to treat me like this,’ but that got him even more irate. He accused me of not being at my station since 11am, which was ludicrous because I started work at noon. Then he left, telling me he was coming back with Jeff, the Costco manager.”
Jeff and the abusive guy escorted Justin to a security room, where another security officer was watching the store’s video cameras. Justin was told to sit down and then had more abuse hurled at him. Justin, age 27, was in this room with three big men in their 40s, - rather intimidating.
“Jeff told me that I couldn’t ‘cuss inside Costco’ and that threw me because I wasn’t the one swearing,” Justin explains. “The security guy screamed that I was a liar. All they had to do was look at their cameras - that would have shown I didn’t do anything wrong. Instead the other security guy put both arms on my armrest and within inches of my face yelled ‘You are a filthy liar, dirty liar, quit lying.’ His sweat flew into my face. I said, ‘You have to let me go and I will not talk to you again without having a labor lawyer present.’ Then he replied that I had to calm down. I left the room and phoned my WDS boss, Nahid. She said Costco is not allowed to reprimand me without one of my bosses present.
“Nahid asked me to finish the day and I agreed. But within five minutes, the security guard was mouthing threats from two aisles away. I called Nahid again and she asked him to leave. Negative. So Nahid said I could go home because it was a ridiculous situation.
“I packed up and he followed me out of the building, so again I called Nahid and said I didn’t feel safe returning to this location. That was the last time I was in Costco. I have been out of work since July 18th. WDS could easily give me a position in another Costco but I think that Costco told WDS to fire me. I loved my job; I loved giving free samples to the public.
“My complaint is wrongful termination and verbal abuse, which I think constitutes harassment. I had three men in my face yelling that I am a liar but refused to look at the evidence - the cameras. They ganged up on me to protect the security guy who was obviously having a mental meltdown.
“I am angry. I have experienced anxiety attacks and cannot go into Costco again. The loss prevention guys go to different Costco’s so I could run into him - I know he was threatening me. Ideally I want my job back and I want this guy reprimanded. Costco should be aware that this guy could potentially be dangerous.”
Unfortunately for Justin verbal abuse, like harassment, is illegal only when a person is discriminated against due to their age, disability, national origin, pregnancy, race, religion, gender or other statutes protected by state or local law, according to the California Labor Law.
As for Justin’s employer and Costco, however, they could be held liable for not providing an employee with a safe and healthy workplace under regulations from the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act. OSHA states that an employee faced with verbal abuse can fairly claim that the abuse interferes with their ability to go about daily job duties. An employer can be held responsible for retaining the services of an employee who verbally abuses another employee. So Justin may just have a case.
California Labor Lawsuits Expose Seedier Side of Hollywood
One lawsuit was filed against CBS Studios and one of its employees - a set designer - alleging the set designer offered a woman a job for $10,000 a month if she would have sex with him and give him her pay from her first month of work. After the woman agreed, and carried out her part of the agreement, she alleges he harassed her. According to Courthouse News Service (7/2/13), the victim alleged she was threatened with termination unless she agreed to be the man's girlfriend and she was sent inappropriate text messages.
The lawsuit alleges the man’s bosses knew about the behavior but did nothing to stop it. When the victim continued to refuse the man’s advances, he reportedly threatened to blackball her and defamed her. The lawsuit seeks damages for sexual harassment and retaliation.
Meanwhile, two interns who filed a lawsuit against Fox Entertainment Group were given a summary judgment victory. The Hollywood Reporter (6/11/13) writes that a judge found that Fox Searchlight was the interns’ employer, against Fox’s argument that a production company - and not Fox - was in fact responsible for the employees. The judge found that the two interns were employees and not interns.
The judge also certified a class action to examine internships at Fox. Fox has said it intends to appeal the ruling, but more lawsuits are being brought forward against the company, alleging unpaid interns should be paid for the work they are doing, and failure to pay is a violation of California labor law and the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The findings from this lawsuit could set a precedent for other unpaid internship claims in Hollywood.
California Labor Law: Sexual Harassment Workplace Hazard
Mary dealt with sexual harassment from her boss for the past two years. About four months ago she couldn't take it anymore so she called the California Labor Commissioner’s Office to inquire about filing a California labor lawsuit against her employer. That call prompted her to quit her job and hire an attorney.
"On my third day of work, the owner of the company started to hit on me," says Mary (not her real name). "He started harassing me by making comments like 'You're looking really hot today,' or 'There's something wild about you,' and he would just leer at me.
"That was bad enough and I just put up with it, fearing that I might lose my job if I told him to stop making lewd comments. Then he told me that my customers (I was in sales and worked on commission) wanted me sexually and I was only making sales because of that. It got to the point where I was afraid to bring customers to the office or even talk to customers because I felt too dumb to get a sale on my own. Either way he was putting me down. And as you can imagine, my self-esteem was virtually non-existent."
Mary adds that on several occasions he harassed her in front of co-workers. While that in itself is demeaning, it can likely work in Mary's favor??"a dispatcher and office manager have promised to testify in court. And according to Mary, her office manager was sexually harassed.
Mary adds that she was also discriminated against. She was the first salesperson to be hired, but during her two years of employment, several men were hired, all of whom received a higher base salary and more commissions than Mary.
"I didn't find out that I was discriminated against for a long time but I had my suspicions," Mary explains. "One guy told me, when he was first hired, that he couldn't afford health insurance for his family, but several months later he showed me a diamond ring that he bought for his wife. It was hurtful, to say the least, especially because I was the only salesperson meeting the quotas but getting less commission."
After Mary phoned the California labor board and decided to seek help from a California labor law attorney, she wrote a resignation letter. "This guy harassed me for too long and I don't want to be a victim anymore," she says. "After I quit, it felt like I just got out of prison. But my self-esteem is still non-existent and I have anxiety attacks."
Given the fact that Mary put up with sexual harassment for two years, her health problems could be a lot worse. And all too often, symptoms of sexual harassment are unrecognized. Last month myhealthnewsdaily listed these six side effects of sexual harassment (of course there are many more):
• Depression
• Post-traumatic stress disorder
• Elevated blood pressure
• Sleep problems
• Neck pain
• Suicide
According to Amy Blackstone, a sociologist at the University of Maine, about 70 percent of women and 45 percent of men have experienced some form of sexual harassment in the workplace. Not only are they working in a hostile environment, they are also at risk for physical and psychological health problems, and sometimes they can cause irreparable damage.
Some people may ask why Mary stayed at her job for two years, or why she didn't confront the owner. Like so many in her situation, she was afraid of losing her job.
"You make the best of the situation and take it, what else can you do?" she says. "I was afraid, especially in these economic times, but this guy should be accountable and he has to stop. And it isn't just me that he targeted; now that I have a lawyer we are considering a class-action suit against him."
As for the discrimination issue, Mary says she doesn't know how to figure out the monetary damages. "Who knows how much he was paying these guys, how much would I have made if I had the same opportunities as they had?" Mary's labor law attorney can help.
Under federal law, the EEOC's definition of sexual harassment is "unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment." That definition also applies under California law.
When Is Bullying and Harassment a California Labor Law Violation?
"When the people these bullies pick on are in a protected category (e.g., gender, race, religion or pregnancy) that is when they step over the line," says Ballman. "Those are the categories that bullies tend to latch onto. They will also sometimes pick on someone in an emotional situation, someone in a delicate mental state and can torment them to death. You see how bullying affects kids and it happens in the workplace??"people can become suicidal or have a nervous breakdown." However, even if an employee believes he or she is being bullied or harassed by their employer, a supervisor, or a co-worker or they are in a "hostile work environment," they may not have a California labor law claim.
"If we don't accept bullying in schools, why is it acceptable at work?" says Ballman. When is bullying "unacceptable" and how do you determine whether you have a claim and what should you do about it? Ballman advises the following:
Report it:
One statement I hear of too much is "I was harassed, so I quit and then I told them why." This is a frequent mistake. The United States Supreme Court says that, where an employer has a published sexual harassment/discriminatory harassment policy, the employee must report it under that policy and give the employer the opportunity to fix the situation. If you did not avail yourself of the employer's policy before quitting, you are giving up your right to sue for a violation.
Employer's duty:
Appropriate remedies may be to discipline or warn the harasser, to move the harasser, under some circumstances to move the victim, to do training, or in extreme cases, to terminate the harasser. But they don't have to take any action at all. They only have a duty to maintain a safe workplace. You might still have to work with the harasser.
What to put in the report:
General harassment, hostile environment, bullying and other disruptive behavior that is not addressed to an employee for a protected status or activity is not illegal. So before you write the long letter airing all your grievances against your boss, you may want to have an attorney look at it, or just make sure you are addressing your protected status. If you do complain, put it in writing and call it "FORMAL COMPLAINT OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT" or "FORMAL COMPLAINT OF RELIGIOUS HARASSMENT," or whatever category you fit into. Set forth the harassment due to your protected status, and be businesslike. This is not the time to air all your complaints about the business or your boss, only to air the specific complaint about the illegal behavior.
If you are harassed or are in a hostile work environment, make sure you understand your rights and responsibilities. Report it to the employer and give them a chance to address the situation. If they allow the harassment to continue or if they retaliate, contact an employment attorney to discuss your legal options.
Here are some tips from Ms. Ballman:
a. Many employees simply refuse to go back to work, even where the employer has warned or disciplined the harasser. Sometimes, the fear is justified. But it is the employer's duty to create a safe workplace. If you return and are retaliated against or continue to be harassed, report it again. If the employer allows retaliation or continued harassment, that is the time to get an attorney involved.
b. Employers will usually take accusations of this type of conduct seriously. Once they are on notice, they will be held liable if they allow it to continue, and they know it. And most employers know that this behavior is disruptive, has nothing to do with making money, and can adversely affect morale. Even if the employer takes no action, by reporting their inaction to the EEOC or your state agency, you have put these agencies on notice that this behavior is occurring. The employer will have no excuse when the harasser does it to the next employee. And in some cases, you may have a remedy.
c. While a long letter stating that your supervisor is incompetent or a jerk can and should get you fired, the formal complaint addressing illegal behavior should get a serious response.
d. While bullying isn't illegal, harassment due to race, age, sex, national origin, disability, color and religion are illegal.
e. If the bully is targeting certain age, sex, ethnic or other groups, they've probably crossed over into illegal harassment.
f. Bullies are a huge drain on corporate time and assets. Employers should adopt zero tolerance policies regarding bullies.
Golf Course Company Facing California Labor Lawsuit
Morton Golf - a co-defendant named in the lawsuit - provides management services for the city's four golf courses. At the heart of the lawsuit is the golf course known as Bing Maloney and the manager assigned to that course by Morton Golf, Andrew Wilson.
Wilson, identified as a former Marine and also named in the suit, has been accused of sexual harassment together with various other violations of California labor employment law, including affronts to regulations that govern meal breaks and payment of overtime.
The plaintiffs allege their meal and rest breaks - legislated by California and labor law??"were denied them. It is also alleged that employees working at the Bing Maloney course were instructed to clock out after eight hours, in spite of having additional work to perform, on some days, after they had punched out.
As for the sexual harassment allegations, one of the four plaintiffs described the work environment at the California golf course as "incredibly hostile." Allegations against Morton Golf and Wilson include lewd and inappropriate comments, and sexual touching. Two of the plaintiffs are female, while two are male. One of the male plaintiffs was dating a female plaintiff at the time, and was thus caught up in what was described in the lawsuit as sexual harassment on a daily basis.
The other male plaintiff alleged violations to California state labor laws.
Three of the plaintiffs no longer work for Morton Golf, while a fourth has moved from Bing Maloney to the pro shop at Bartley Cavanaugh, another of Sacramento's four golf courses. It is not clear if the plaintiff is still employed directly by Morton Golf, even though she is working at a city course managed by one of the two defendants. Pro shops often have different management and ownership structures.
The California employee labor lawsuit comes at a particularly sensitive time for Sacramento City governance. In May, Sacramento City Council voted to increase the city's stake in the management services of Morton Golf on the city's behalf, by contracting out course maintenance services to Morton as well. The move, as reported by The Bee, would save the City of Sacramento $500,000 per year - but would also result in the layoff of 38 unionized employees.
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:
