WebIwekaogwu v. City of Los Angeles, 75 Cal.App.4th 803, 814 (1999), quoting Flait v. North American Watch Corp., 3 Cal.App.4th 467, 476 (1992). In order to be protected against discharge, a complainant need only make a good faith complaint about working conditions that they believes to be unsafe. Cabesuela v. WebSep 29, 2004 · (Flait v. North American Watch Corp. (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 467, 476, 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 522.) The claimant establishes a prima facie case by showing that the …
Blog ‐ Whistleblowing and Hazardous Working Conditions
WebAppellant Flait went to work as a sales representative for respondent North American Watch Corporation (NAWC) on February 1, 1984. Flait's employment agreement states … WebAug 13, 1999 · ( Flait v. North American Watch Corp. (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 467, 476, 479.) Pretext may be demonstrated by showing ". . . that the proffered reason had no basis in fact, the proffered reason did not actually motivate the discharge, or, the proffered reason was insufficient to motivate discharge. [Citation.]" ( Gantt v. Wilson Sporting Goods Co. daily thanthi news live youtube
Carr v. Barnabey
WebAnheuser-Busch, Inc. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1238, 1245-1246 [32 Cal.Rptr.2d 223, 876 P.2d 1022]; Flait v. North American Watch Corp. (1992) 3 Cal.App.4th 467, 475-476 [4 Cal.Rptr.2d 522]; Mixon v. Fair Employment & Housing Com. (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1306, 1316 [237 Cal.Rptr. 884].) As is evident, however, the FEHA defines a "discharge" as a ... Web(Kerr v. Rose, supra, 216 Cal.App.3d at pp. 1561-1562; cf. Flait v. North American Watch Corp. (1992) 3 Cal. App. 4th 467, 481 [4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 522].) The alleged manufacture and assertion by defendant of false reasons for terminating plaintiff's employment may also be actionable as a breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. (Pugh v. WebNorth American Watch Corp. (1992) 3 Cal. App. 4th 467, 475-476 [4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 522].) In Texas Department of Community Affairs v. In Texas Department of Community Affairs v. … biona brown lentils