On April 19, 2020, Judge James V. Selna of the United States District Court, Central District of California, granted a motion to declare pro se plaintiff Peter Strojnik, Sr. a vexatious litigant, requiring him to obtain the permission of the Court before filing any future accessibility lawsuits with the District Court. Federal courts by statute
In Castro-Ramirez v. Dependable Highway Express, Inc., decided April 4, 2016, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District held California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees who are associated with a person with disabilities.
Plaintiff Luis Castro-Ramirez’s son was in need of a kidney transplant, required daily dialysis, and Ramirez was the only member of his family capable of operating the dialysis machine. Ramirez drove a delivery truck for Dependable Highway Express, Inc. (DHE). When he began his employment in 2010, he informed his supervisor that he needed to be assigned schedules that would permit him to be home in the evening to administer his son’s dialysis. …
Continue Reading California Court of Appeal Expands FEHA’s Reasonable Accommodation Requirements to Employees Who are Associated with a Person with Disabilities
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) both require employers to make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with disabilities, provided that the accommodations do not impose an “undue hardship” on the employer.
By definition, a reasonable accommodation is any modification or adjustment to a job, to an employee’s work environment, or to the way things usually are done that enables a qualified individual with a disability to enjoy an equal employment opportunity. It also is any modification or adjustment that allows an employee to perform the essential functions of a job that similarly situated employees without disabilities hold. The reasonable accommodation process can be tricky to navigate, and mistakes can lead to unwanted litigation. Here is a list to help you identify and avoid the most common employer mistakes.…
Continue Reading Top 10 Mistakes to Avoid During the Reasonable Accommodation Process
A depressed employee who was fired for threatening to kill his co-workers was not a qualified individual entitled to protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act, as the employee could not perform essential job functions, with or without an accommodation, a federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled, affirming judgment in favor of the employer. Mayo v. PCC Structurals, Inc., No. 13-35643 (9th Cir. July 28, 2015). The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction over Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.…
Continue Reading Death Threats Against Co-Workers Defeat Employee Disability Discrimination Claim, Federal Court Rules
Last month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued new Enforcement Guidance (“Guidance”) on pregnancy discrimination in the workplace and related issues. In its first update in over thirty (30) years, the Commission clarified how Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) interact to protect pregnant employees. If you are an employer in California, you may be thinking, “Great. Another change in the law and now I am stuck with trying to figure out how these changes apply to my business. Now what do I need to do to make sure the policies and procedures in our handbook are up to date?”
The new guidelines prohibit employers from forcing pregnant workers to take leave and acknowledge that “employers may have to provide light duty for pregnant workers.” After childbirth, lactation is now covered as a pregnancy-related medical condition.
Also, it’s not just women who will benefit. The guidelines say that when it comes to parental leave, “similarly situated” men and women must be treated on the same terms.
Here are some tips to consider when reviewing and updating your handbooks:
A divided panel of judges at the Ninth Circuit held a plaintiff must demonstrate some statistically significant evidence in support of his or her disparate impact claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, even though such evidence may be very difficult to obtain. Lopez v. Pacific Maritime …