Five Common Misconceptions About California Employment Law

We often speak with both employees and employers who have the same misconceptions about California employment law, which are important to be aware of in order to easily avoid unnecessary and often expensive mistakes:  
1. "We Don't Have to Give a Reason for Firing an At-Will Employee." California is an at-will employment state. Generally speaking, an employer may terminate an employee at any time, with or without notice, and with or without stating a reason. Many employers incorrectly conclude that because they are not legally required to provide a reason for termination, they should never give a reason. 

However, when an employer refuses to explain why someone was fired, this may raise a suspision that the employer is trynig to hide a potentially unlawful reason. Otherwise, why couldn't the employer just cite the typical performance, attitude, etc... If that employee files a wrongful termination case,  the absence of any explanation invites looking into whether unlawful discrimination or retaliation played a role. 
Providing a truthful and well-documented reason for a termination can sometimes reduce suspicion and strengthen the employer's defense.

Real-Life Example: An employee with excellent performance reviews is terminated immediately after requesting a disability accommodation. The employer simply says, "California is an at-will state. We don't have to explain why." During litigation, internal emails reveal managers discussing frustration with the employee's medical restrictions. The employer's refusal to give any explanation for the final decision to fire becomes one of several facts suggesting that the reliance on "at-will employment" was being used to hide an unlawful motive.

2. Not Every Form of Retaliation Is Illegal.  In fact, most types of retaliation California law only prohibits retaliation for engaging in legally protected activity. Protected activities include the following: 

• Reporting discrimination or harassment.
• Complaining about wage and hour violations.
• Reporting workplace safety violations.
• Requesting a reasonable accommodation.
• Taking protected medical or family leave.
• Reporting conduct the employee reasonably believes violates the law.

However, if an employee complains about something that is not legally protected, retaliation may be unfair, but it is not unlawful.

Real-Life Example: Employee A complains that the office coffee is terrible and management wastes money on unnecessary renovations.
Employee B complains that female employees are being paid less than male employees performing substantially similar work.
If both employees are later disciplined, Employee B may have a retaliation claim because the complaint involved alleged unlawful discrimination. Employee A generally would not, because complaining about coffee or management's business decisions is not protected activity, so even if Employee A was clearly terminated for making those complaints, this would not form a basis for a wrongful termination case. 
The key question is not whether the employer retaliated—it is whether the retaliation was because the employee engaged in activity protected by law.

3. A Hostile Work Environment Must Be Based on a Protected Class. People often use the phrase "hostile work environment" to describe an unpleasant workplace. Legally, however, a hostile work environment has a much narrower meaning. An abusive supervisor, rude coworkers, favoritism, yelling, or personality conflicts generally do not violate California's anti-discrimination laws unless the hostility is motivated by a protected characteristic such as:

• Race
• Sex
• Disability
• Age
• Religion
• National origin
• Sexual orientation
• Gender identity
• Another characteristic protected by law

The law does not require employers to provide a pleasant workplace. It only prohibits discrimination. Thus, a manager who constantly screams at everyone, insults employees, and creates a toxic workplace regardless of gender, race, age, or disability doesn't create an environment that would be considered "hostle" under the law. 
Now imagine the same manager repeatedly mocks an employee's accent, makes derogatory comments about her religion, or ridicules her disability. Those facts may support a hostile work environment claim because the hostility is tied to a protected characteristic.

4. Wrongful Termination Requires Evidence of an Illegal Reason—Not Simply an Unfair One. Many employees understandably believe they were fired unfairly. However, California law generally does not prohibit employers from making poor business decisions, firing good employees, or terminating someone based on inaccurate information. Instead, a wrongful termination claim typically requires evidence that the termination violated a law or public policy.
Examples include termination because of:

• Race or other protected characteristic.
• Disability.
• Taking protected medical leave.
• Reporting illegal conduct.
• Serving on a jury.
• Refusing to participate in illegal activity.
• Exercising another legal right.

Real-Life Example: A company mistakenly believes an employee made a costly accounting error and terminates him. A month later, the company discovers another employee was actually responsible. The termination may have been completely unfair, but unless the decision was motivated by an unlawful reason, the employee may not have a wrongful termination claim.
By contrast, if the employee was fired because he complained about not being paid his overtime due, that same termination may violate California's retaliation laws.
The difference is not whether the employer was wrong—it is whether the employer violated the law.

5. Taking Protected Leave Does Not Make an Employee Immune From Termination. Many employees believe that once they take protected medical or family leave, they cannot legally be fired. That is another common misconception. Protected leave does not provide permanent job immunity.
Instead, it generally means that it would be unlawful for an employer to  terminate an employee because that employee exercised a protected legal right (but the employer can still choose to do so). 
If the employer can prove the employee would have been terminated regardless of the leave—for example, because of a company-wide layoff, documented misconduct discovered before the leave, or elimination of the position—the termination may still be lawful.

Real-Life Example: An employee takes approved CFRA leave for surgery.
While the employee is away, the employer eliminates an entire department as part of a company-wide reduction in force affecting dozens of employees.
The fact that the employee was on protected leave does not automatically make the termination unlawful.

Now consider a different scenario. A supervisor complains that an employee's medical leave is "too inconvenient" and terminates the employee immediately after the leave begins, even though no layoffs or performance issues exist. Those facts may support a claim that the termination was motivated by the employee's protected leave.
The legal issue is not whether the employee was on leave. The issue is whether the leave motivated the employer's decision or whether it was at least one of the motivating reasons for termination. 

---