Los Angeles, Calif. (February 17, 2022) - The California Supreme Court's recent unanimous decision in Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc., __ P.3d __, 2022 WL 244731 (Cal., Jan. 27, 2022) clarified the burden for employers that are defending against whistleblower retaliation claims brought by employees. The state high court confirmed that the employee-friendly standard articulated in Labor Code section 1102.6 applies to claims for whistleblower retaliation brought under Labor Code section 1102.5, and that the burden-shifting framework borrowed from the United States Supreme Court's decision in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973) 411 U.S. 792 (McDonnell Douglas) ? which is applicable to employment discrimination cases ? is not the appropriate standard to use.
Lawson Highlighted Widespread Confusion Among California Courts as to Which of Two Evidentiary Standards Applied to Section 1102.5 Retaliation Claims
In Lawson, a paint merchandiser employee claimed that his employer had fired him because he blew the whistle on his supervisor's fraudulent paint mis-tinting practices, in violation of Labor Code section 1102.5. PPG moved for summary judgment.
Labor Code section 1102.5 provides whistleblower protections to employees who disclose wrongdoing to authorities. As relevant here, section 1102.5 prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee for sharing information the employee has reasonable cause to believe violates a local, state, or federal rule or...
CNN is defending its reporting on a statement given by Iranian officials regarding a ceasefire agreement the U.S. and Iran reached just hours before President Trump was set to launch an attack on ...