Posts Tagged ‘California Court of Appeal’

4-Part Test Announced for Distinguishing Unpaid Sabbatical and Paid Vacation Leave

When can an unused paid sabbatical leave be taken by the employee as paid vacation leave upon termination? A California Court of Appeal provided an answer recently, adopting a four-part test for making that distinction under California law.

In the case before the court, after the employee resigned and did not receive any pay-out for his unused sabbatical, he filed a class action claiming that the sabbatical was the legal equivalent of extra vacation for long-term employees.

The court sent the case back to the trial court for further development of the record. Along the way, it established this four-part test for determing whether paid time off qualifies as a sabbatical and by extensionĀ  when paid time of must be treated as vacation.

The factors of this new test are: (1) frequency of the leave; (2) length of the leave; (3) whether the leave must be in addition to regular vacation; and (4) whether the leave must be for the purpose of enhancing the employee’s value as an employee upon his or her return to work.

To learn more, go here.

“Me Too” Evidence Gets Boost in California Courts

Suppose you are a plaintiff in a sexual harassment lawsuit and you want to show that other women were also harassed by the same manager when you weren’t in the room or even employed by the employer. This evidence could significantly bolster your case. A pattern of discrimination is arguably more persuasive for a jury than a single instance–and more difficult for an employer to refute.

Well, now a California Court of Appeal has expanded the ability of sexual harassment plaintiffs to introduce what’s become known as “me-too” evidence. It ruled recently that such evidence is admissible to show discriminatory intent and to impeach the harasser.

To read more about the case and its implications, click here.