banner

RETALIATION

  Employees should report acts of discrimination and harassment.  Sometimes after an employee reports discrimination or harassment to a supervisor, manager, owner, or HR, the employee suffers an adverse employment action such as: termination, harassment, demotion, isolation, a harmful job change, etc.  If the employer causes the reporting employee to suffer an adverse employment action because of the reported discrimination or harassment, then that is unlawful retaliation.

  California law also protects employees who report discrimination directed toward another employee.  Similarly, an employee who opposes an employer’s discrimination or harassment of another employee, applicant, apprentice, intern, volunteer, or third party may not suffer an adverse employment action because the employee opposed the discrimination or harassment.

  If you are an employee who feels that you have suffered discrimination, harassment, or retaliation, please do not hesitate to contact Ward Heinrichs to get more education about your situation.

  Likewise, employers should feel free to discuss potential work place discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation that may have occurred on the job.  Employers should do an impartial investigation and analysis of the situation and take adequate remedial action when necessary.

  California has many different laws that prohibit work place retaliation when employees engage in protected activity.  For instance, the California Labor Code has 43 different retaliation statutes: Labor Code §§ 96(k), 98.6, 230(a), 230(b), 230(c), 230(e), 230(f), 230.1, 230.2(b), 230.3, 230.4, 230.5, 230.7, 230.8, 232(a) & (b), 232.5, 233, 244, 245-49, 432.7, 432.8, 432.9, 752, 1019, 1024.6, 1025-28, 1030-33, 1041, 1101, 1102, 1102.5(b), 1171, 1197.5, 1198.3, 1311.5, 1512, 2814, 2929(b), 2930, 6310, 6311, 6399.7, 6403.5.  Other California Codes have retaliation protections too. Those laws protect employees who whistle blow, exercise constitutional rights, seek to enforce work place rights, participate in legal processes and hearings, and who engage in other types of protected activities.

  Two of the most commonly invoked retaliation laws relate to adverse employment actions (termination, demotion, layoff, etc.) directed at employees who seek protections under the anti-harassment and anti-discrimination laws of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Government Code §12940 et seq.) and who seek protections under a California Whistleblower law (Labor Code §1102.5 et seq.).

  Under FEHA, if an employee reports discrimination or harassment or opposes an act of discrimination or harassment, the employer may not terminate, demote, reduce wages, isolate, etc. the employee for reporting or opposing discrimination.  In many cases, the employer may not take those adverse actions even if the employee was not correct.

  Likewise, a whistleblower can report perceived illegal activity to the government, law enforcement, a person in authority, or an employee with authority to investigate the activity if the reporting person has “reasonable cause” to believe that information discloses a violation of a statute or regulation.  If the employer retaliates under those circumstances, then the adverse action would violate the whistleblower anti-retaliation law.

  Other retaliation laws protect many other types of protected activity, such as: sick leave, work place safety, jury duty, domestic violence victims, victims of crimes, teacher-parent school activities, non-work related political activity, etc.

  I offer free consultations to both employers and employees.  Sometimes employers need counsel before they terminate a person when the activity might be protected.  When employees suffer a termination or other adverse employment action under circumstances that might be protected, I am equally available for consultation.

 

To speak to Mr. Heinrichs call: 858-292-0792

  A receptionist will answer and will connect you to him.  If he is unavailable, the receptionist will leave a message, and he will return your call.

PLEASE FOLLOW US HERE

Visit Us On FacebookVisit Us On TwitterVisit Us On Google PlusVisit Us On LinkedinVisit Us On YoutubeCheck Our Feed

For FREE Consultation!

Brief description of your legal issue:

First Name

Best Email

Phone

captcha
Please write the text above in the field below

REVIEWS

“Mr. Heinrichs is truly the most caring attorney I have ever met. After calling for an initial consult and leaving a message, my call was returned with in 30 minutes. He listened to me with out making me feel like a dollar sign and agreed to take on my case. I never had a problem communicating with him. He explained the process and informed me of every next step. I always knew what to expect and what time frame I was looking at. He worked hard on my case and I was happy with the outcome.” Amy L. Lakeside, CA
“This is the second time I employed the service of this firm and I got a very positive outcome from my labor issue. Mr. Heinrichs is very understanding and professional and his negotiation skills are very effective in lending a voice to any employee that has to face a well defended and lawyered up corporation. I also recommended him to a friend of mine a couple of years back and he was able to also get a decent severance package for that person.”
M. S. Del Mar, CA
“Ward Heinrichs was very effective in helping me resolve my labor issues with my company. He advised me on settlements and we received the desired outcome very quickly. He also ran through various options on his fees and let me chose the one that worked for me. He is a pleasant and professional attorney and I recommend him highly.” L R. San Diego, CA
“My name is Jeffrey Walters and I was the lead class representative in a case against Pacific Eagle International Security, Inc., a company that provided armed security guard services for the U.S. Navy. During our case, Ward Heinrichs always responded to my phone calls and many e-mails regarding the many problems we all faced with this case. We worked closely together to prove that California wage law applied to Pacific Eagle, even though the class of security guards worked on property controlled by the Navy. Pacific Eagle believed that only federal wage law applied to it. Without Mr. Heinrichs’ unwavering persistence and total command of the difficult issues in the case, we probably would never have received the money Pacific Eagle owed us. Mr. Heinrichs presented the case through facts obtained through vigorous research. After two years of litigation, Pacific Eagle finally agreed to pay $900,000.00 to settle the class action for unpaid wages, un-reimbursed expenses, penalties, etc. I received $15,000.00 for being one of the class representatives in addition to my share of the money that Pacific Eagle owed me and my fellow security guards. I am very grateful for the hard work and commitment.”
Jeffrey Walters
“Ward Heinrichs is professional and knows employment law. He is personable, always answers his phone and was available anytime I called. As a person in transition for the very first time in 25 years, he has helped me move forward without any regrets. I would recommend Mr. Heinrichs for any employment related dispute.”
JFM Temecula, Ca.