All Employees in the state of California are presumed to be in an \u201cat will employment status\u201d unless they have a contract or collective bargaining agreement stating the period of time or length of employment.<\/p>\n
At Will Employment<\/strong> All Employees in the state of California are presumed to be in an \u201cat will employment status\u201d unless they have […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[510,587,594],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2125","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-retaliation","category-termination","category-wages-withheld"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\nBasically this means that the employee and the employer both have the right to terminate the employment relationship at any time, without giving notice or warning. Neither party needs to give a reason, and if they do give a reason it doesn\u2019t have to be a good reason, it can be as ridiculous as they want. Which brings me to \u2026.
\nWrongful Termination<\/strong>
\nThere are really only 2 ways in which an at will employment situation can have a wrongful termination. The reason for the termination must be based on either discrimination or retaliation. This is often confusing because if we look up the definition of discrimination in Webster\u2019s dictionary we would find:
\nb : the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently
\nHowever, under California labor laws Discrimination is not as broad. Instead it is narrowed to only include situations pertaining to:
\n\u2022 Ethnicity or national origin
\n\u2022 Age \u2013 over 40
\n\u2022 Gender \u2013 equal pay act
\n\u2022 Sexual orientation or gender identity
\n\u2022 Religion \u2013 religious garb
\n\u2022 Disability \u2013 medical issue
\nIf a termination cannot be proven to be linked to one of these categories, then the only other way to have a wrongful termination is to have been subjected to retaliation.
\nRetaliation
\nAgain\u00a0Webster\u2019s definition of retaliation\u00a0is more broad than what California labor law will recognize. The dictionary describes retaliation as:
\n\u201cto return like for like; especially : to get revenge\u201d
\nAnd California labor law narrows that to pertain to whistle blowing, meaning that retaliation can usually only occur if the employee has blown the whistle or reported the company for breaking some kind of law, code, regulation or industry standard. A simple disagreement or reporting your manager for being unfair or unprofessional unfortunately will not qualify as retaliation or whistle blowing, even if that manager acts out in revenge.
\nLabor law is complex; if you have any questions regarding your employment it is recommended that you contact a\u00a0California labor law attorney\u00a0who can help you understand your rights and in many cases will review your situation without charge.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"