Bald Legal

Join host Drew Levine of Levine Labor Law as he sits down with attorney Lauren Grochow to discuss the realities of labor law. This conversation highlights the impact of the Dynamex case in California, which significantly redefined the criteria for classifying individuals as independent contractors.

In this episode of the Bald Legal Podcast, we welcome Lauren Grochow, owner of Grochow Law, to provide her expert perspective on the legal landscape. This conversation explores how the law is intended to work for employees and the practical application of employment rights in everyday situations.

Whether you are navigating a complex workplace issue or simply want to understand the legal protections available to you, this discussion sheds light on the advocate's role in the labor law process. We break down the professional insights necessary to ensure you are informed about your legal rights when dealing with employer disputes.

Chapters:

00:00 - Dynamex Case: Worker Misclassification Explained

03:31 - Employer Savings Through Misclassification

06:24 - Contractor vs. Employee: Key Differences

09:27 - Dynamex Drivers Reclassified for Savings

12:44 - Drivers Sue Over Contractor Status

15:38 - The ABC Test for Worker Classification

18:53 - Control, Business, and Competition Factors

20:55 - Legislature Adopts ABC Test, Defines Exceptions

24:00 - Professional and Performing Arts Exemptions

26:39 - Borello Test, Gig Workers, and Protections

29:28 - Misclassification Penalties and Remedies

31:32 - Employer Penalties, Lawsuits, and Fees

In this episode, Drew Levine and guest John Barber delve into a significant California Supreme Court ruling concerning mixed-motive employment terminations. The case, involving a probationary bus driver with performance issues and alleged pregnancy discrimination, highlights the complexities of balancing an employer's right to address poor performance with anti-discrimination laws.

How did a simple apple pie become key evidence in a workplace
discrimination lawsuit?

In this episode, employment attorneys Drew Levine (Levine Labor Law) and Alexander Vialy break down Roby v. McKesson Corporation, a case where a supervisor's cruelty, from excluding an employee from office treats to mocking her medical condition, led to a jury verdict holding both the company and the supervisor personally liable. In this episode, we unpack disparate treatment vs. disparate impact, how harassment and discrimination can overlap, and what this case means for employee rights today.
Chapters:
00:00 - Apple Pie Case and Legal Nuances
09:12 - McKesson, Roby, and Panic Attacks
12:01 - Disparate Impact vs. Treatment
15:00 - Policy Neutrality and Workplace Realities
18:26 - Unfair Termination of Disabled Workers
20:51 - Medication Side Effects and Mistreatment
24:04 - Disability Termination and Discrimination
27:19 - Discrimination and Harassment Simultaneously
30:17 - Supervisor Liability for Claims
33:23 - Broadening Law for Fair Civil Rights

In this episode, employment attorney Drew Levine, joined by personal injury attorney Connor Traut, break down one of the most jaw-dropping cases in California employment law: Yanowitz v. L'Oréal USA.

In this episode of Bald Legal, employment attorneys Drew Levine (Levine Labor Law) and Alexander Vialy break down Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co., the landmark case that fundamentally reshaped California employment law. When an ARCO employee was fired for refusing to participate in an illegal price-fixing scheme, his refusal sparked a legal revolution that established the right to sue for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. In this episode, we unpack the limits of at-will employment, how tort law stepped in where contract law failed, and why standing up against illegal employer demands remains a protected right today.

Chapters:

00:06 - Wrongful termination and ARCO case

03:21 - Employment law evolution and moral wrongdoing

06:52 - California labor code and Tameny case

09:33 - Gordon Tameny's price fixing role

11:41 - Tameny's wrongful discharge suit

15:00 - Contract vs. tort in wrongful termination

18:29 - Termination violating public policy

22:00 - Whistleblower protection and fair employment

25:15 - California at-will employment explained

27:56 - At-will employment not absolute

Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.