Arleta Employment Lawyers
The trial attorneys of the Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. stand ready to fight for both employers and employees in Arleta, California.
Arleta, California
Arleta is a neighborhood of the City of Los Angeles. It is situated in the center-north section of the San Fernando Valley and is home to more than 30,000.00 Angelenos. It covers approximately three square miles, and encompasses the following zip codes: 91331, and 91224. The area of Arleta was a relatively undeveloped portion in the west of the community of Pacoima. This area remained semirural up to World War II when manufacturers expanded their operations into the valley and created more jobs. In order to accommodate factory workers, residential development increased in the area. Arleta is therefore largely residential. The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. is headquartered in the City of Los Angeles which is minutes away from Arleta. The Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C. stands ready to provide legal services to both employees and employers in Arleta.
The Best Wrongful Termination Lawyer in Arleta Are Minutes Away
While Arleta thrives as a community, it is primarily recognized as a residential hub, resulting in a limited presence of lawyers or law firms within its borders. When you conduct a Google search for an “Arleta employment lawyer,” or “wrongful termintion lawyer in Arleta” the results are often populated with paid advertisements from attorneys in neighboring areas like downtown Los Angeles or Century City. This can make it challenging to identify the right attorney with the necessary expertise, as selecting solely based on paid advertisements from non-local attorneys can be a daunting task. Discovering an attorney well-versed in employment law and experienced in resolving such disputes is not as straightforward as it may initially appear. At the Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C., each of our attorneys boasts nearly two decades of extensive experience in the field. Our legal team has consistently delivered successful outcomes for both employers and employees alike. Our firm operates on the principle of prioritizing quality over quantity. Located just a short distance from Arleta, we are ideally situated to offer residents of this community unparalleled legal representation. Whether you are an employer seeking to navigate complex employment issues or an employee facing workplace challenges, you can trust the Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C. to provide you with the highest caliber of legal support and advocacy.
We Can Vigirously Defend Arleta Residents In Matters Involving:
Featured Article:
Understanding California Disability Discrimination Laws After a Back Injury
📌 Key Takeaways If you've faced job consequences after a back injury, understanding your legal rights could change everything. FEHA Covers Back Injuries: Under California law, back injuries that limit major life activities qualify as protected disabilities requiring workplace accommodations. Interactive Process Is Not Optional: Employers must engage in a good-faith, timely discussion about accommodations or risk violating Gov. Code § 12940(n). Accommodation Denials Raise Legal Flags: Refusing reasonable modifications without demonstrating undue hardship may breach FEHA mandates under § 12940(m). Documentation Strengthens Your Position: Preserving written communications, medical restrictions, and employer responses helps establish whether statutory violations occurred. Timing Can Signal Retaliation: Terminations or negative treatment shortly after injury disclosures may indicate retaliatory motives subject to legal scrutiny. Empowered employees ask the right questions—and know when to call a qualified employment attorney. Identifying Disability Discrimination Under California Law Back injuries are recognized as potential disabilities under California Government Code § 12926. California law defines a disability as a condition that limits major life activities, including lifting, walking, or working. An employee with a qualifying back injury may be protected by the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Disability discrimination occurs when an employer treats an employee unfavorably due to a protected medical condition. Conduct such as termination, demotion, or reassignment may qualify as an unlawful employment practice under FEHA. Unwelcome differential treatment based on an employee’s disability status may raise red flags about the employer’s compliance with California law. California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) Statutory Framework FEHA applies to employers with five or more employees in California. The statute—outlined in California Government Code §§ 12900–12996—provides specific protections against disability discrimination and requires employers to comply with clear procedural obligations. Under California law, generally, an employer must engage in a timely, good-faith interactive process to determine whether reasonable accommodations are available. These accommodations are intended to help qualified individuals perform the essential functions of their position without imposing undue hardship on the employer. FEHA protections are distinct from but complementary to the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Where both laws apply, the statute offering the greatest level of protection to the employee is typically utilized. Concrete Statutory Violations in Back Injury Discrimination Cases Employers operating in physically demanding industries—such as construction, manufacturing, logistics, or healthcare—are more likely to face disability-related claims when they fail to accommodate work restrictions resulting from back injuries. A failure to engage in the interactive process is a violation of California Government Code § 12940(n). Similarly, refusing to provide a reasonable accommodation, where one is available and does not impose an undue hardship, may violate § 12940(m). Common patterns that may indicate statutory violations include: Terminating an employee shortly after medical leave related to a back injury Reassigning an employee to unfavorable duties without exploring accommodations Ignoring medical documentation or refusing to discuss modified work responsibilities Retaliatory actions following a disability disclosure or accommodation request may also constitute separate violations under FEHA, particularly when they result in adverse employment consequences. ... Read more
Millions of Dollars Recovered For Our Clients
Check Out Our Case Results