UC San Diego Discrimination and Wrongful Termination Lawsuit Reaches a Settlement

A former UC San Diego Vice Chancellor filed a discrimination lawsuit in 2019. UC San Diego recently resolved the lawsuit by agreeing to a settlement. 

Former High-Ranking UC San Diego Employee Reaches a Settlement: 

Jean Ford was the Assoc. Vice Chancellor for UC San Diego Health Sciences Advancement. Ford filed a discrimination lawsuit in 2019 suing the UC Regents and Chancellor Pradeep Khosla. Ford alleges age discrimination, gender discrimination, and wrongful termination. 

The Plaintiff’s History on the Job: 

Before working for UC San Diego, Ford was with Columbia University Medical Center for a decade. She moved to San Diego to take her place at UC San Diego in 2015. In the lawsuit, Ford alleges that she experienced both discrimination and harassment from Chancellor Kholsa because she was female and over 40. When Ford complained about illegal conduct, she claimed she was retaliated against. In her complaint, Ford claimed that Kholsa promoted a younger, less experienced man as Ford’s new supervisor. In the course of her career, Ford has been a successful fundraiser for 25 years. UCSD recruited her and after recruiting her, they had their most successful year of fundraising - hitting almost $150 million under Ms. Ford’s guidance of fundraising efforts. 

The UC San Diego Discrimination and Wrongful Termination Lawsuit Settlement: 

The UC Regents approved the settlement agreement recently, but the terms of the settlement agreement were not made public. The plaintiff’s counsel indicated that all parties involved have amicably resolved the claims contained in the suit, and that none of the parties involved admits any wrongdoing. Unprecedented operational challenges due to the global Covid-19 pandemic and mandated court closures causing litigation delays were cited as reasons for the expedited resolution. 

If you need to discuss workplace discrimination or if you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Former ”Jeopardy” TV Game Show Employee Claims Sony Alleges Wrongful Termination & Age Discrimination

Glenn Kagan, 66, claims that Sony fired him from his job as a contestant-wrangler for the long-running TV game show “Jeopardy!” Kagan says he was replaced by a younger employee when the show started filing again during the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Plaintiff Sues Sony for Age Discrimination and Wrongful Termination: 

The veteran contestant-wrangler filed suit in California state court alleging that he worked at “Jeopardy!” for more than half his life, but when the show came back to file amidst the Covid-19 pandemic, Sony suddenly terminated his employment and gave his job to a younger replacement. Kagan brought the age discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuit under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act citing Sony and Quadra Productions as Defendants. The Defendants in the case face wrongful termination and overtime pay violation allegations. 

Plaintiff Fired and Replaced by Younger Employee Amid Covid-19 Pandemic: 

In the lawsuit, Kagan claims that the company replaced him with a much younger contestant coordinator after falsely accusing him of improper mask-wearing at work. The plaintiff was allegedly fired in August 2020 despite 34 years of employment. In the lawsuit documentation, Kagan claims he had no write-ups or reprimands on the job, no prior warnings, but was fired for not wearing a mask even though he was not provided with any protocols or instructions for wearing a mask. Kagan also claims the company did not provide any personal protective equipment. Kagan claims the real reason Sony fired him was to replace him with a younger employee. 

Plaintiff’s Job History on the “Jeopardy!” TV Game Show: 

The plaintiff was employed as the “Jeopardy!” TV game show’s senior contestant coordinator. As Senior Contestant Coordinator, Kagan was responsible for taking the trivia game show’s contestants to the green room, helping as a “stand in” for Alex Trebek during rehearsals, communicating with contestants, and assisting contestants with their necessary paperwork. A contestant coordinator in his 20’s was promoted in 2016, and according to Kagan, the younger employee gradually took over Kagan’s duties (i.e. stand-in work, etc.), yet according to Kagan, the show had not raised any issues related to Kagan’s work performance. 

Returning to Work After Telecommuting During the Covid-19 Pandemic: 

In July 2020, when Kagan returned to set for the show’s 37th season after several months of working remotely during the Covid-19 pandemic, he was assured along with other returning employees that “Covid Captains” would be providing personal protective equipment and instruction upon their return to work. Kagan alleges there was no guidance, no rules and no masks provided. Kagan claims he brought his own mask from home. Kagan states that his mask inadvertently slipped at one point during the day while he was speaking with a contestant, and that he pulled his mask down to speak to a security guard who was not able to understand him on another occasion. These are the only two occurrences Kagan can think of that producers and human resources could be referring to when they conducted a video meeting with him the next day and reprimanded him for “failing to wear a mask.” Kagan claims he responded that the company did not provide PPE or guidance/policy regarding mask wearing. In response to the discussion, he was suspended. While Kagan was suspended, the younger coordinator took over his job. Kagan was fired a few weeks later. 

Plaintiff Cites Multiple Employment Law Allegations: 

In addition to claiming wrongful termination based on age discrimination, Kagan claims he frequently worked over 40 hours in one week, but did not receive overtime pay, and also claims he did not receive accurate wage statements.

If you need to discuss how to file a California overtime lawsuit or if you have questions about identifying California Labor Law violations, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Instagram Influencer, Bilzerian, Faces Wrongful Termination Lawsuit After Firing Former President

Curtis Heffernan, former President of Ignite, claims Dan Bilzerian’s reputation as a gun-loving playboy enjoying a lavish lifestyle filled with luxury and travel and supermodels, is actually “rented” with the company picking up the tab.

Instagram Influencer Fires President for Questioning his Addiction to Using Company Money:

In the lawsuit, Heffernan claims that Bilzerian’s exorbitant expenditures were regularly billed to the company, Ignite. Bilzerian founded Ignite and serves as CEO and majority shareholder. Curtis Heffernan looked into the Instagram Influencer’s finances and identified tricks Bilzerian used to hide his personal spending using business funds. 

Bilzerian Allegedly Billed Lavish Personal Expenses to the Company 

According to Heffernan’s wrongful termination lawsuit, many personal expenses were billed through the company, like Bilzerian’s $2.4 million annual rent for his home in the LA hills. Heffernan suggests that the addiction Bilzerian indulges for using company money for his lavish, personal lifestyle is to blame for the company’s $50 million loss in 2019. 

Other Employees Support the Claims Made by Former Ignite President:

While Bilzerian responded to the allegations by denying them outright in a statement to TMZ, other former Ignite employees have confirmed allegations. One former employee confirmed that Ignite pays for “everything…models, events, yachts…[as long as it was] wrapped in the Ignite logo…it was an Ignite expense, and he would send them the bill.” 

When Did the Investigation of Misuse of Company Funds Start?

In May 2020, Ignite accountants preparing the company’s annual report raised some red flags about inappropriate spending. Some examples of “personal spending” identified using company funds included:

• $200,000 per month rent for LA hills home (periodically used for marketing events)

• 2-night trip to London (in the six figures)

• $75,000 paintball field

• $65,000 “Four Elements Guns & Star Wars Set”

• $50,000 bed frame

The accountants identified a total of $843,014.06 in company expenses that were actually “personal” expenses billed through the company.

Wrongful Termination Lawsuit Seeks Damages:  

Heffernan filed suit alleging wrongful termination, defamation, and violation of whistleblower protection laws. The California wrongful termination lawsuit seeks damages.

If you need to discuss employment law violations in the workplace or file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago. 

Former Pinterest COO Files Gender Discrimination and Wrongful Termination Lawsuit

Francoise Brougher was Pinterest’s former COO, one of the highest-ranking executives in the company. Brougher recently filed suit claiming the company violated California labor law. 

Did Pinterest Violate California Labor Law?

When Pinterest’s former COO spoke up about gender discrimination at the company, she claims she faced workplace retaliation followed by wrongful termination.

Brougher’s History at the Company:

Brougher started work as Pinterest’s Chief Operating Officer in March 2018. After serving in a number of business leadership roles at respected companies like Google, Square, and Charles Schwab, she joined the company. When Brougher took the job as Pinterest COO, she was the highest-ranking female employee at the company. After some time at the company, she couldn’t ignore that she repeatedly encountered what she describes as “archetypal” gender discrimination by male co-workers.

Archetypal Gender Discrimination at Pinterest:

In one example of archetypal gender discrimination described in Brougher’s lawsuit, her boss advised her to “be mindful” of how she behaved in a group setting - specifically discouraging Brougher from “communicating directly.” Pinterest is a social media platform whose user base is predominantly female – 70% of Pinterest users are women, but three men run the company. Even as the highest-ranking woman in the company, Brougher was allegedly expected to comply and conform to typical gender stereotypes. After refusing to comply with discriminatory stereotypical expectations, Brougher was marginalized and excluded from important meetings and essential company decisions. When she eventually complained of degrading, sexist treatment, she was terminated. Brougher was advised that she was fired during an April 2020 video call. 

Responding to Complaints of Harassment in the Workplace:

Employment law protects California workers from discriminatory treatment and harassment in the workplace. However, when Brougher complained about the sexist, demeaning treatment, the company allegedly did not take the complaint seriously. She claims that instead of investigating the complaint properly and addressing gender discrimination and hostile workplace concerns, Pinterest fired Brougher to protect the male co-workers who were engaging in hostile behavior. Additionally, Brougher claims Pinterest attempted to cover up the complaints by claiming her firing was a voluntary departure. Brougher also claims she was paid less than her male counterparts, who also enjoyed more favorable vesting schedules.

If you need to discuss workplace retaliation or if you need to file a California wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago. 

The Simpsons’ Composer’s Discrimination Lawsuit Moves Forward

The Simpsons is preparing to reach new audiences on Disney+, but that’s not the only news the long-running Fox show is generating. Legal tensions between the show’s producers and the show’s longtime composer, Alf Clausen, are also drawing attention. 

Simpsons Composer Files Discrimination Lawsuit Against Popular Fox Show:

LA County Judge Michael L. Stern issued an order allowing The Simpsons composer to move forward with his discrimination lawsuit against the show’s producers. 

Hollywood Music Giant Files Discrimination Suit Against The Simpsons Producers:

Alf Clausen, the 79-year-old Hollywood music giant, handled the music for the popular Fox show from 1990 until he was fired in 2017. Clausen won two Emmys and is the most nominated composer in Emmy history with a record 23 Emmy nominations during his career. Before his work on The Simpsons, Clausen composed for a number of different tv shows: The Donny & Marie Show, The Mary Tyler Moore Hour, Little House on the Prairie, Fame, and Moonlighting. He also worked on a number of successful feature films like Weird Science, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, The Naked Gun, and Mr. Mom. 

Identifying the Cause of Termination: Why Was Clausen Fired? 

The litigation regarding Clausen’s termination is based on why he was fired. Clausen claims wrongful termination based on age discrimination and disability discrimination (he’s diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease) in his lawsuit. Clausen also claims he is the victim of intentional infliction of emotional distress. In contrast, The Simpsons producers claim that their decision to fire Clausen was not related to his age or disability. They claim they fired Clausen because of deficiencies as a composer. The defendants insist that Clausen was delegating composition to his team inappropriately. They also claim he wasn’t able to capture their vision for certain types of music. 

Moving to Strike the Complaint at an Early Phase of Litigation:  

The defendants, Fox, Disney+, etc. argued that the lawsuit was Clausen’s frivolous attempt to infringe on their right to free speech. As such, they argued that they had a statutory right under California’s Anti-SLAPP statute to move to strike at an early phase of litigation. Judge Stern considered the defendant’s argument and found that the plaintiff, Clausen, met his burden of proof for disability discrimination and wrongful termination claims, but not for age discrimination or intentional infliction of emotional distress claims. In doing so, Judge Stern allowed Clausen’s case to move forward to the discovery process. 

If you need to talk about employment law violations, or if you need to file a California wrongful termination lawsuit, we can help. Get in contact with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

Did Raising Covid-19 Concerns Lead to a California Woman's Wrongful Termination?

When the ad agency she worked for introduced a cruise line campaign amid the Covid-19 pandemic, Tiffani Harcrow was concerned. As a responsible employee and human being, she voiced those concerns. For doing so, Harcrow claims she was fired. 

Omelet Ad Agency Faces Wrongful Termination Lawsuit:

Tiffani Harcrow is a former employee of Omelet, an ad agency out of Culver City, California. Harcrow claims she was fired because she voiced her concerns about the agency's upcoming campaign to promote Princess Cruise Lines as "safe for travel" amid the pandemic. She didn't feel comfortable with the way the project minimized the risk of Covid-19, and felt it would be wrong to take part in the Princess Cruise Line ad campaign because it was misleading. Harcrow was fired in May 2020.

Harcrow Alleges Various Employment Law Violations:

The Plaintiff in the case, Harcrow, is 33 years old and was hired in May 2018 to fill the Associative Creative Director position at Omelet. During her time on the job, she received "glowing" work evaluations, and was regularly described as an all-star receiving praise from top professionals in the creative industry. Harcrow is now suing Omelet, her former employer and Culver City ad agency, alleging wrongful termination, retaliation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and unfair business practices. Harcrow's suit seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. Harcrow claims she was wrongfully terminated in May 2020 because she voiced her concerns questioning the honesty of the Princess Cruise Lines assignment at Omelet LLC and vocalized concerns that the campaign actively minimized the potential health threat of coronavirus. 

Retaliation for Voicing Concerns About the Misleading Campaign:

The retaliation Harcrow allegedly experienced in response to making her concerns about the project clear are classic whistleblower retaliation. In this particular instance, the whistleblower retaliation took place amid a worldwide crisis when an unprecedented virus swept the globe creating a global (deadly) health pandemic. Omelet did not respond to the media's request for comment after Harcrow filed suit, and Princess Cruises is not listed as a defendant in the case. 

Standing Up to Unreasonable Demands in the Workplace:

In April, when Omelet insisted that Harcrow lead her team in developing what she claims was a "materially false" Princess Cruise Lines marketing campaign that would be both misleading and dangerous amidst the global pandemic, she couldn't do it. The agency insisted they wanted her to create an aggressive marketing campaign that she saw as obviously designed to mislead consumers and create the misleading impression that it would be safe to travel on Princess Cruise ships on June 30th, even though evidence did not support this claim in any way. An ad agency briefing from April 22nd, 2020 spells out the client's own alleged objective to mislead their target market into believing the cruise ships were safe for travel. At that same time, Harcrow and other employees at Omelet ad agency knew official government agencies were already investigating the alleged failure of the cruise industry to protect passenger and cruise staff safety amid the pandemic. On March 14th, U.S. Centers for Disease Control issued a no-sail order that suspended all cruise line operations for 30 days. The following month, the no-sail directive was renewed through July 24th, 2020. While all evidence seemed to support Harcrow's concerns, he agency stood by their decision to urge the public to accept the cruise line as safe for travel. When Harcrow disagreed, she was allegedly terminated from her position.

If you need to discuss employment law violations in the workplace or file a wrongful termination lawsuit, please get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.

California Mom Working from Home Claims Employer Fired her for Noisy Kids

A California mom recently filed an employment law complaint suing her former employer. Drisana Rios, a former insurance account executive, was working from home due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Rios claims she was terminated from her position because her kids were noisy while she took work phone calls.  

Was California Mom Fired Because Her Kids Were Noisy While Working from Home? 

Rios is now suing her former employer claiming gender discrimination and wrongful termination. Rios claims that she was told that the kids could be heard on business calls with clients and it was unprofessional. In Rios' complaint, she alleges that coronavirus closures in her area left her with no childcare options for her two children, a 4-year old and an infant. During the forced work from home stint, Rios was juggling nursing, nap schedules, and children's lunches while trying to complete her work – all at the same time because her boss insisted on scheduling work calls during the lunch hour. Rios claims she suggested afternoon calls to her boss and even made it clear that her schedule allowed for afternoon calls, but he continued to schedule the calls during the lunch hour while regularly complaining about hearing noise from the children in the background. 

Juggling At Home Life and Work Life in One Space During Covid-19 Business Closures: 

Rios described her time working from home with her two young children as a time when she was working very hard – she was meeting the deadlines even if that meant she was working at night too to make up for anything that needed to get done before she started work the next day. When the media reached out to Rios' employer, HUB International, they said that while they didn't comment on pending litigation, they were proud that they had successfully transitioned 90% of their over 12,000 employees who were able to work from home for their own and the public's safety during the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Experts Chime in on Parents, Expectations, and Working from Home During Covid-19:

Experts hearing more and more cases similar to Rios' are reminding parents that they might need to renegotiate expectations while they're working from home without access to childcare. Set yourself up for success in a new "work from home" stage by designating boundaries. Decide what you need to do to be successful in a work from home environment, identify what your employer needs from you, and what your family needs from you. And remember that you may be surprised by how many people on the other end of your business phone call, or web conference, or zoom meeting are dealing with very similar situations. It's easy at any time for working parents to feel like they're failing at everything, but it's a particular problem during the pandemic. Some qualifying employees consider options offered through the Families First Coronavirus Response Act. 

What Is the Families First Coronavirus Response Act? 

The act provides caregivers with the option to take leave if they need to care for a child whose childcare provider or school is unavailable or closed due to Covid-19. The act allows qualifying parents to receive full or partial pay for as many as 12 weeks. 

If you need to file a wrongful termination lawsuit or if you need to discuss other employment law violations, don't hesitate to get in touch with Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik DeBlouw LLP. Experienced employment law attorneys are ready to assist you in any one of various law firm offices located in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, Riverside, and Chicago.