Mr. Gupta’s wrongful termination cases will focus on getting monetary awards and settlements on wrongful termination claims on behalf of California workers.
In California, wrongful termination law has a specific meaning. It does not mean that the termination was wrong, or unfair. It means that the California termination violated one or more California laws.
For example, it is unlawful for a California employer to fire an employee due to gender, pregnancy, age, race, disability, taking of a medical leave, requesting a reasonable accommodation for a disability, national origin, sexual orientation, age, marital status, or because the employee engaged in whistleblowing by complaining about or otherwise opposing certain specified unlawful, fraudulent or unethical conduct.
Mr. Gupta also litigates cases involving wrongful termination law for employees who were fired for standing up for victims of discrimination and harassment.
Sexual harassment is a form of gender discrimination. Mr. Gupta handles such cases on behalf of both women and men. Both men and women may sue for sexual harassment. The harasser need not be of a different gender than the victim and the victim need not prove that the harasser was motivated by sexual attraction.
The most common examples are sexual or sexist comments, negative stereotypes about the victim’s gender, sexual jokes, propositions, lewd remarks or insults directed at one sex but not the other.
Such harassment can also occur when a co-worker offers any job benefit, or threatens any job detriment, in exchange for sexual favors. In lay terms, this means that any time a co-worker promises, either expressly or impliedly, that career advancement may be linked to dating or sex, the law has been violated.
Other Harassment Cases
General “harassment”, like yelling, screaming, demeaning language, or unfair workload, is not “unlawful” if based merely on a personality conflict. Such conduct is only illegal if the harasser is motivated by prejudice because of one’s race, sex, age, disability, national origin, sexual orientation, or age. Mr. Gupta handles such illegal forms of harassment with the caveat that if the discriminatory remarks are combined with frequent, general harassment, like yelling, screaming, or use of a demeaning or disrespectful tone, the combination may be sufficient to violate the law.
Wage and Hour Violations
Mr. Gupta handles wage and hour individual and class action lawsuits involving California employers' violations of California’s overtime, minimum wage pay compensation, meal and rest break, prevailing wages, tip pooling, and equal pay (e.g. unequal pay based on race/gender) laws.
Under California law, an employer may not fire an employee in retaliation for that employee engaging in whistleblowing, which generally consists of complaining about or reporting certain specified conduct that he/she reasonably perceives to be unlawful, fraudulent or unethical conduct. Mr. Gupta represents numerous employees in wrongful termination claims and lawsuits arising from such whistleblowing activities.
Complaints about illegal or unethical conduct may be protected under various California whistleblower statutes. When an employee refuses to engage in unlawful or unethical conduct, that may also constitute whistleblowing which is protected from retaliation.
Leaves of Absences
Under the federal Family & Medical Leave Act (FMLA), or the California Family Rights Act (CFRA), an employer that regularly employs more than fifty (50) people within a seventy five (75) mile radius is required to permit employees that have more than one year of service to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid family leave if they, or their parents or children, have a “serious medical condition.”
Even if an employer has as few as 5 employees, the employer must provide a worker with a leave of absence or other accommodation unless the employer can prove that a requested leave of absence or accommodation would impose an undue hardship on its operations.
Mr. Gupta represents clients who are denied leaves of absences or other accommodations and/or a retaliated against for taking a leave of absence by alleging violations of federal and California state law.
Under California law, if an employee requires time off or a medical leave of absence due to a protected disability or medical condition, an employer may be required to provide that time off or additional medical leave time as a reasonable accommodation for that disability even if the employee has already used 12 weeks of leave under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or California’s Family Right’s Act (CFRA).
Under California law, employees with disabilities are entitled to reasonable accommodations, including medical leaves of absence, and extensions of medical leaves of absence. Unless an employer can prove that a requested accommodation would impose an undue hardship on its operations, California employers will be held liable for failing to provide any accommodation that would have permitted an employee to return to work and perform his or her essential job functions.
The California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) protects against pregnancy discrimination by explicitly prohibiting California employers from harassing, demoting, terminating, or otherwise discriminating against any employee for becoming pregnant. The pregnancy discrimination law applies to all California employers that regularly employ five (5) or more full-time employees in the preceding year.
CFRA family leave may also be taken for adopting or bonding with a child. “Baby bonding leave” may be taken immediately following a pregnancy disability leave or at any time within 12 months of the baby’s birth. Theoretically, if an employee has a difficult pregnancy, she may be entitled to up to four months of Pregnancy Disability Leave (“PDLL”), plus an additional 12 weeks of “baby bonding” leave once she recovers from her pregnancy-related disability. Mr. Gupta handles such cases as well.
Other Discrimination Cases
Mr. Gupta files claims under The California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), which prohibits a California employer from committing acts of discrimination against any employee because of that employee’s race, national origin, age, and other protected classes.