Richard Guerra v. Mr. Rooter Plumbing
Discrimination—Labor Code § 132a—WCAB affirmed WCJ’s finding of § 132a violation when, among other things, none of the reasons defendant employer articulated for applicant’s termination were stated to applicant at the time he was terminated, there was no evidence that, although defendant had to reduce its workforce due to the economic downturn, applicant would have been one of the employees laid off if he had not been injured, applicant was released to work full duties and under no restrictions when he was terminated and therefore did not need accommodations, which defendant later claimed it was unable to provide, defendant offered to keep applicant as an independent contractor doing the same work, this despite defendant’s later claim that applicant was unable to continue doing the same work, applicant was singled out for disadvantageous treatment when evidence showed defendant’s standard layoff procedure was not used to terminate applicant, and defendant failed to meet its burden, once applicant satisfied his prima facie case, to prove termination was motivated by business necessity. © Copyright 2010 LexisNexis. All rights reserved.
HOW TO VIEW THE PDF LINK FOR THE PANEL DECISION: Be sure you have (1) registered at our site (registration is free), and (2) signed onto your account. Having problems? Email me at Robin.E.Kobayashi@lexisnexis.com.
NOTE: SOME SITE USERS HAVE REPORTED PROBLEMS VIEWING THE PDF LINK. If this is happening to you, please email me at Robin.E.Kobayashi@lexisnexis.com and I'll be more than happy to email you the PDFs.