Hiring Preference

21 Nov Proving employment discrimination

Posted at 15:24h in California Law, Disability Discrimination, Employment Discrimination, Hiring Preference, Pregnancy, Race Discrimination, sex discrimination, Wrongful Termination

Proving employment discrimination can be challenging. Most employers won't openly admit to discriminating against you. But that doesn't mean they haven't done so. Nor does it mean you can't prove that they did. You can still use circumstantial evidence to prove discrimination in court. Unfortunately, employers can sometimes convince a judge to throw out a lawsuit before it gets to a jury if there's not enough evidence. So how do you prove your case to the judge when you don't have any direct evidence of discrimination? And how do you convince a jury your employer discriminated against you when the employer can deny they did? Proving employment discrimination through direct evidence The first way of proving employment discrimination is through direct evidence of discriminatory animus. If your employer fired you and explicitly said it was because of your skin color, that's direct evidence of discrimination. In this instance, proving discrimination would simply mean proving what the employer said. If you have direct evidence of discrimination, that should be enough evidence to get you to the jury. If the jury believes that evidence, you're in a good position to win your case. But this is not typical. Usually, the employer offers some legitimate reason for taking the action it took. This can be anything, but it common examples are performance or trying to save money on labor. Even if the reason the employer gives is obviously untrue, you still don't have the same direct evidence of discrimination. In these cases, the employer will often file a motion asking the court to dismiss the case because there's no evidence of discrimination. So how do you prove discrimination in such cases? McDonald Douglas burden shifting Fortunately, the second way to prove employment discrimination, called the McDonald Douglas test, is made for these types of cases. This Supreme Court created this test in McDonald Douglas v. Green, hence the name. The Supreme Court created this test to help analyze cases lacking direct evidence of discrimination. Here's how it works. Initially, the plaintiff has the burden to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, the plaintiff must show (1) that she was the member of a protected class, (2) that she suffered an adverse employment action (e.g. firing, demotions, etc.), (3) that she was qualified, and (4) that similarly situated employees not within her protected class were treated more favorably. For example, if you are an African-American who was terminated despite being qualified and performing adequately, while similarly situated non-African-Americans were not terminated, you would have a prima facie case of discrimination. This is a fairly easy standard to meet. You just need some evidence of each element. Once the employee has established a prima facie case, the employer has the burden to offer a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for the adverse employment action. Once, it does, the burdens flips back to the employee to show that the employer's offered reason was not actually what motivated it. If you can provide some evidence that the reason the employer offers wasn't the real reason, the judge should let your case go to the jury. Proving discrimination to a jury Once you get to the jury, the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence goes away. You simply use whatever evidence you have to convince the jury that the employer took action against you for an unlawful reason. Of course, direct evidence is best. But you wont have that in most cases. At this stage, there's all sorts of ways to convince the jury. How you do so depends on the facts of your case. For example, say the employer insists they fired you because you were not performing well. In that case, you could use a recent positive performance review to show that's not a credible reason. Likewise, if your boss made derogatory comments about you, that's evidence that the employer's decisions was based on a discriminatory motive. If you believe your employer has discriminated against you, contact the Khadder Law Firm today for a free consultation. For more, follow us on Twitter and Instagram....

21 Feb Possible Mediation Outcomes

Posted at 09:58h in Accomodations, Calculating Damages, CFRA, Damages, Disability, Disability Discrimination, Emotional Distress, Employment Discrimination, Failure to Accommodate, FEHA, FMLA, Hiring Preference, Leave of Absence, Long Term Disability, Loss of Employment, Loss of Income, Mediation, Medical Condition, Mental Disability, Physical Disability, Re-Employment, Remedies, Resignation, Settlement, Short Term Disability, Trial, Work-Life Expectancy, Wrongful Termination

One of the possibilities in mediation settlement is for the employer to agree to reinstate the employee to the position that they held before they were demoted, or to increase the employee’s pay back to their original pay before their pay was reduced. Mediation can also provide the employee with money for any economic harm or emotional distress that they suffered because of discrimination. For example, if you were paid less, you could, in a mediation, get the employer to agree to reimburse you for the difference of what you were originally paid with what they were paying you when they reduced your salary. However, if you sue your employer, chances are there is going to be some, if not a lot, of friction. Often, in a mediation, an employer will demand, as part of a settlement that involves a payment of substantial money, that the employee resign from their employment and agree never to seek re-employment with that employer in the future. That is not always easy to accept, but if the employer is willing to pay enough money to settle the case, then it may be worth it to resign from your job and agree never to reapply for any job with that same employer. That’s a tough decision to make. Some people would rather have steady income than take a big lump sum of money and have to find a new job. Each case is different, and you have to weigh the risks and benefits of each decision. It is important to consider all of these things if you decide to take legal action against your employer while still employed. For people who have been terminated, the decision is much easier. If they have been wrongfully terminated, there is not going to be the issue of awkwardness or friction at the workplace, because they are no longer there. That makes the decision of taking legal action easier. But, just because you are still employed, by no means should you automatically give up your legal rights to stay with the employer. If you have been discriminated on the basis of your disability by your employer, contact an employment lawyer today at the Khadder Law Firm for a free initial consultation....

18 Feb Disability Discrimination and Continuing Employment – Is Mediation the Answer?

Posted at 09:54h in Accomodations, Calculating Damages, California Law, Damages, Disability, Disability Discrimination, Employment Discrimination, Failure to Accommodate, FEHA, FMLA, Hiring Preference, Long Term Disability, Mediation, Protected Categories, Remedies, Settlement, Short Term Disability, Trial, Wrongful Termination

Most likely, if somebody is still employed but they experience disability discrimination other than termination; for instance, their job duties or responsibilities are reduced, they get demoted or their pay is reduced simply because they have a disability, then you may still have a disability discrimination case that is worth pursuing. It is awkward to say the least, however, to sue an employer when you are still working for the employer. That’s not to say it doesn’t happen, but in those cases, often the best course of action for all parties involved, especially the employee with the disability, is to try and resolve the case short of going to court or having a trial. Mediation is a voluntary process. The parties don’t have to accept a settlement. But, there is a lot more room for creativity if a case is settled in mediation or other negotiations as opposed to having to take a claim to trial and get a judgment. If you have been discriminated on the basis of your disability by your current employer, contact an employment lawyer today at the Khadder Law Firm for a free initial consultation. ...

14 Feb If someone were denied employment and more qualified for the job than the applicant who was successful in getting the job, how does one prove that case?

Posted at 09:51h in Accomodations, ADA, Calculating Damages, California Law, California Supreme Court, CFRA, Damages, Disability, Disability Discrimination, Emotional Distress, Employment Classifications, Employment Discrimination, Failure to Accommodate, FEHA, FMLA, Hiring Preference, Long Term Disability, Loss of Employment, Loss of Income, Medical Condition, Mental Disability, Protected Categories, Undue Burden, Undue Hardship, Work-Life Expectancy

Let’s first look at a situation where an applicant with a disability objectively is not as qualified as a person without a disability. Let’s assume that their qualifications are not less than a person without a disability because of their disability, but it’s because of some other factor such as education or skill. The employer doesn’t have to give preference to the person with a disability if that person with a disability is objectively less qualified than the person without a disability. If the employer hires the person without a disability over someone with a disability who is more qualified, that, in and of itself, can be evidence of discrimination. Rarely is there direct evidence of discrimination in disability cases or other cases. It is extremely rare where you would have evidence of an employer writing an e-mail or sending a message to the effect of, “I don’t want to hire that person because of their disability,” because employers are a lot savvier than that. You have to show through circumstantial evidence that it is more likely than not that you, as a person with a disability, did not get a job because of your disability. There could be stray comments to prove discrimination on the part of an employer to hire you, you may have evidence of comments that were made by an employer or supervisor where they made fun of people with disabilities, where they treated other people with disabilities poorly, or other things to show that the person had a discriminatory animus toward people with disabilities. There is very rarely any direct evidence of discrimination, but with enough circumstantial evidence you may be able to overcome the burden of proof to prevail on a disability discrimination claim. In California law, and more recently in the California Supreme Court, it was held that the disability has to be a substantial motivating factor for the employer’s decision not to hire or to fire, or do some other adverse employment action. Therefore, you have to show that the employer was substantially motivated by your disability. That raises the bar a little bit. It used to just be simple motivation: Your prospective employer could have ten reasons why they didn’t hire you, and one of the reasons of those ten was your disability, and the other nine were non-protected reasons. Now, the bar is a little bit higher. In the past, that was enough to win on a disability discrimination case. Now, it’s got to be a little bit more than that; it has to be a substantial motivating factor. If you have been refused a job because of a disability or a need for a disability accommodation, contact an employment lawyer today at the Khadder Law Firm for a free initial consultation. ...

15 Dec Degenerative Diseases: Must An Employer Keep You on Until You Are Unable to Perform the Essential Functions of Your Job?

Posted at 10:16h in Accomodations, ADA, California Law, Damages, Disability, Disability Discrimination, Employment Discrimination, Essential Functions, Failure to Accommodate, Hiring Preference, Protected Categories, Remedies, Wrongful Termination

It is important to note that if you cannot perform the essential functions of your job, even with an accommodation, then the employer does not have an obligation to keep you employed. This is where the accommodation requirement is essential - so that people who have disabilities or degenerative medical conditions will have reasonable accommodations for as long as they can perform the essential functions of their job with the accommodation. If it comes to the point where, despite all of the reasonable accommodations, the employee cannot perform the essential functions of their job, then the employer may not be required to keep them employed. The question of what are essential functions are taken on a case-by-case basis: It’s a fact-intensive inquiry. Ideally, the essential functions will be construed as narrowly as possible, because employers will often argue that there is a whole list of essential functions even though there really are only one or two essential functions. The challenge is to narrow this lists of essential functions so that an employer is not permitted to terminate you because you can’t perform something they claim is an essential function, but is, in fact, objectively not. If you have been discriminated on the basis of your disability by your employer, or future potential disability, contact an employment lawyer today at the Khadder Law Firm for a free initial consultation. ...