Page 7 - Los Angeles Vol 5 No 4

CARNEY SHEGERIAN | Employment Law
Public Interests and Protection for Employee
Whistleblowers
This year more than ever before, we are seeing a growing align- ment between concerns that employees express in the workplace, and those that are of concern to the general public. Many times, we see these employees—or, rather, “whistle- blowers”—terminated and/or retaliat- ed against for speaking up about their concerns—the most common of these concerns being health and safety is- sues.
We see this in employment litiga- tion all the time: An employee com- plains to his/her employer that the company is engaging in unlawful or unsafe conduct, and they are red shortly therea er for no real reason or a false reason. It’s unfortunate that instead of listening to employees to x the issues and create a better, safer working environment, employers will choose to take the approach of silenc- ing the employee by terminating their employment.
Finding a Voice
Still, the employee regains their voice when they le a lawsuit—not only because they are standing up for themselves because of what they went through with their employer for do- ing the right thing, but also because when the lawsuit is led in court, the case is accessible to the public and inherently creates greater awareness of the issues presented in the case. Litigation sparks the public’s desire for more information about the case; media and news outlets keep a close eye on lawsuits that are led against companies that are known to con- duct themselves in a negative manner that is of public concern; and overall, it goes a long way in preventing un-
lawful and unsafe conduct that com- panies and employers engage in. e greater the awareness of these issues, the better.
Our court system is of utmost value when it comes to disseminating infor- mation to the public, who have a right to know about these issues which sometimes directly a ects them. However, because public issues and employees’ complaints in the work- place are so intertwined now, there is a greater desire for information by the public and media. e problem is that sharing more information outside the context of litigation can sometimes prejudice and compromise the litiga- tion process—especially from a law- yer’s standpoint.
What creates an even greater prob- lem is that these employees, and former employees, frequently have signed arbitration agreements that bury the complaints in a private fo- rum where the public has zero access to the case. e companies are then able to continue their unethical, ille- gal practices while keeping those who know the truth quiet.
e dilemma here for us as attor- neys, is that we want our clients to spread the unique knowledge and in- sight they have to help prevent safety issues or injuries from occurring. At the same time, we do not want to do anything to compromise the case, and that o en means facilitating all com- munications to and from our client.
The Case of the Bird
A prime example of all of this is with the recent emergence of the Bird electric scooters and the growing vol- ume of articles and news segments we are seeing about people being killed or
AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com
seriously hurt while riding the scoot- ers. To put this in the employment context, an ex-employee of Bird, who worked as a eld operations associ- ate, claimed that the electric-scooter company told him to ignore issues such as loose handlebars or missing screws, and leave scooters with these problems on the streets for public use, even if it meant compromising the safety of the riders or pedestrians.
Bird’s ex-employee was red for raising these concerns to the company and for expressing his concerns that the scooter company’s conduct was killing people. Being knowledgeable in the industry, the former Bird em- ployee received a job o er from an- other scooter company not long a er his wrongful termination from Bird. But a er a news article aired re ect- ing the ex-Bird employee speaking out about his safety concerns about Bird, the scooter company rescinded their o er and advised him that by speaking out he had ruined his career.
It is threats and actions like this that prevent people from coming forward. Not only are they concerned about their job safety if concerns need to be raised but can also face long-term repercussions and retaliation for do- ing so both within their company and their entire industry.
ere needs to be more account- ability across the public and private sectors to create work environments where employees
feel they can prop- erly conduct their jobs, while keeping the public safe.
Since launching Shegerian & Associates, Carney Shegerian has developed a reputation as The People’s Attorney — ghting passionately for the rights of his employee clients. As an experienced trial attorney, he has tried numerous jury trials to verdict. Winner of the 2013 Trial Lawyer of the Year Award as a result of trying a number of signi cant cases, Shegerian was also nominated, and a nalist, for the award in 2006, 2010-2012. His record of success for his clients is unparalleled. Shegerian has won over 77 jury trials, including 34 seven- gure verdicts as a plaintiff’s attorney.
7