Most California employers understand they cannot fire someone just because the person is male or female. However, what some apparently do not realize is that firing someone because she is pregnant is included in the law protecting workers from sex discrimination. The supervisors of a nonprofit daycare center in another state may have realized quickly that a pregnant worker was protected by law, but they did not help their situation by continuing to harass her because of her condition.
The integrity of a California employee may be challenged when the worker discovers his or her employer is violating federal securities laws through fraud, insider trading or other deceptive practices. The ethical obligation to report the violation may conflict with the employee's fear of workplace retaliation. Fortunately, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act provides workers with incentive to report. Recently, however, there are questions about how the law should be interpreted.
The members of California families depend on each other to provide for their needs and care for them when they are sick. When those two things are at odds, family providers may feel torn, especially if the company where they work is not sympathetic toward their situation. Based on recent reports, it might be safe to say that Walmart is one of those companies. In fact, Walmart's policies may be violating provisions in the Family Medical Leave Act.
For too many people in California, harassment and mistreatment are just another part of the work day. Women may be especially vulnerable to the advances and abuse of more powerful people in their companies, but certainly men also face discrimination in the workplace. As the culture evolves and more people seek justice and fairness in all aspects of life, it may seem incongruous that people are still sexually harassed on the job, but former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson is trying to do something to change that.
A federal judge has ruled in favor of a class of Transportation Security Administration agents and air marshals who claim a cost-saving reorganization plan was a pretext for age discrimination. The agency closed field offices in San Diego, Phoenix, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh and Tampa, then allegedly made it "extremely difficult, expensive, unpalatable, and problematic" for older employees to transfer to new jobs, the lead plaintiff says.