Legal Question in Employment Law in California

I sent the question below at least 2 weeks ago. Is there an reply "in-the-works?"

Our place of business has shown consistent practices of implementing policies to accomodate one employee specifically. She was removed from one position due to customer complaints, co-worker complaints, and failure to perform her job duties. In order to minimize the tension in the work-place, she was given a position that was created for her and continues the same work patterns as before. She has been caught abusing the company internet for personal and social reasons, she has been caught using her cell phone periodically throughout the day to text message and make personal calls, and she is consistently late. This employee has also been reprimanded multiple times, and per our current attendance policy she should have been terminated at least 3 times. The President actually instructed the General Manager to "lay off of her," so the General Manager stopped writing her up and documenting all her violations. The employee remains and continues to violate the attendance policy and abuse the internet during company time for personal use. Due to her abusing the internet, the President of the company decided to remove internet access from all employees; however, she still has full internet access. Further, most recently, we have had another employee who has been excessively late for the last two months due to domestic violence occuring in his residence and court hearings for a restraining order and appointments with the Dept of Family Services for a custody suit that he has initiated. The President is now demanding that the attendance policy be enforced and has implied that this other employee should find a job else where due to his tardiness and absences. When his direct Manager told the President that we can't fire this employee since we have not fired the other employee who has been written up multiple times, the President replied that she is salary and he is going to implement two different attendance policies for salary and hourly employees. However, the policy, or violation of a policy, was never a concern for the President until we had another employee who is now having an attendance issue due to his personal situation (which is currently being resolved). The President has also threatened the General Manager and told her that he is going to be hiring another General Manager because she is not enforcing the policies (although she was trying to and he told her to leave the employee alone). It is public knowledge to the employees in this company that the employee who is constantly accomodated has had sexual relations with the President and his wife. The President confided in the General Manager that he has nude pictures of the employee. He recently told the General Manager that what he does in his company is nobody's business and that he has had "good times" with the employee. This is only one situation that has recently surfaced which shows the preferential treatment that this one employee receives and continues to receive on a consistent basis. There is a clear disparity in how she is treated and how the rest of the employees are treated. Is this an actionable item? Is this not considered Disparate Treatment Discrimination?

2 Answers from Attorneys

Related Questions & Answers

More Labor and Employment Law questions and answers in California

Looking for something else?