Former General Manager Files Suit to Demand Justice From Government Contractor

The former General Manager of MV Transportation’s San Leandro, California office filed a lawsuit today in Los Angeles County Superior Court against his prior employer, MV Transportation, and its Regional Vice President, Clarence Michael Stewman (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC614873).  Plaintiff Aaron Gonzales’ lawsuit alleges, among other things, that MV Transportation and Mr. Stewman lured him away from his job in Texas to begin a new position in California based on false promises and representations, and that after he arrived in California, the defendants reneged on their obligation to pay Mr. Gonzales his quarterly bonus for meeting performance goals.

California Labor Code Section 970 prohibits an employer or individual from persuading a person to move residences for a job, “by means of knowingly false representations” regarding compensation or other matter.  Mr. Gonzales’ lawsuit alleges that when he complained about the underpayment of his bonus, the company fired him in retaliation for his complaints, which is unlawful under California law.

MV Transportation provides passenger transportation via fixed-route, paratransit (for people with disabilities) and school buses.  MV TRANSPORATION contracts primarily with government entities across the U.S. and Canada and provides consulting services world-wide.  MV TRANSPORTATION boasts annual revenues of $1,000,000,000.00 (one billion dollars) and operates nearly 10,000 transit vehicles and employs more than 16,500 transit professionals.

Mr. Gonzales is represented by Helmer Friedman, LLP a Culver City, California law firm that represents employees and other individuals who seeking to assert their rights.  Mr. Gonzales’ attorney, Andrew H. Friedman stated, “No private company, particularly ones that receive public money, ostensibly to carry out public services, should be permitted to flout employment laws and betray the trust that taxpayers have bestowed in them.”  Mr. Friedman continued, “Corporations headquartered in Texas sometimes mistakenly think that they can come to California and act like this is the ‘wild west.’  But even corporations headquartered in other states must follow California employment laws.”

For more information about Mr. Gonzales’ lawsuit, please contact Andrew Friedman or Lincoln Ellis at 310-396-7714.   Similarly, if you are a witness or have information that would be relevant to Mr. Gonzales’ claims please contact Mr. Friedman and/or Mr. Ellis.  A copy of Mr. Gonzales’ lawsuit can be found here.

2018-04-12T13:45:54-08:00March 24th, 2016|employment law, fair employment rights, Front Page News, Wage & Hour Violations, wrongful termination|Comments Off on Former General Manager Files Suit to Demand Justice From Government Contractor

Lawsuit Against Hospital for Violating Fair Employment Rights Class Action Certification Denial Reversed by Appellate Court

PRESS RELEASE May 31, 2005

Job Applicants Required to Divulge Reproductive Dysfunctions, Infertility, Pregnancy, Venereal Disease, Still Born Births, and Miscarriages in Order to Get a Job.

The Fourth Appellate District Court of Appeal recently reversed the trials courts’ denial of class action certification in the case of Grace Fontana v. St. Joseph Hospital of Orange, (Superior Court Case No. 03CC02559), arising out of the Hospital’s policy and practice of requiring each and every job applicant to reveal personal and intimate details about their private lives in order to receive employment. 

After offering employment to job applicants, the Hospital required individuals to answer questions such as whether the applicant had ever had:

  1. venereal disease;
  2. taken birth control pills;
  3. problems with infertility;
  4. children with birth defects;
  5. stillborn children;
  6. fetuses/unborn children with birth defects;
  7. miscarriages;
  8. problems with pregnancies;
  9. problems with menstrual periods;
  10. problems with urination;
  11. seen a counselor, psychiatrist or psychologist and
  12. cancer of any kind.”

The Appellate Court ruled: “Recognizing plaintiff’s theory that many questions … are not related to any job at the hospital, and there is no business necessity to ask these questions, it is somewhat difficult to understand why a class cannot be certified, at least for the purpose of establishing whether or not there is class wide liability entitling the class to injunctive relief.

Ms. Fontana’s attorney, Gregory D. Helmer, of HELMER · FRIEDMAN LLP, stated: "For years, the hospital forced thousands of applicants to answer these horribly invasive questions in order to get a job. Now, these individuals may have an efficient way to correct the harm that has been done to them."

Commenting on the decision, Ms. Fontana’s attorney, V. James DeSimone of SCHONBRUN DESIMONE SEPLOW HARRIS & HOFFMAN, LLP stated: “This is an important victory. This decision vindicates the right to a class action for California workers when an employer violates California’s Fair and Employment and Housing Act. The Appeal’s Court was
correctly persuaded by the excellent oral advocacy by attorney Michael Morrison.”

2018-04-12T13:46:01-08:00May 31st, 2005|discrimination, employment law, fair employment rights|Comments Off on Lawsuit Against Hospital for Violating Fair Employment Rights Class Action Certification Denial Reversed by Appellate Court
Go to Top