Best Wrongful Termination Lawyers in Ventura County, California

Have you recently found yourself facing termination from your job? Are you now in search of a highly skilled wrongful termination attorney in Ventura? Your quest concludes here. Look no further for the premier Oxnard wrongful termination attorney. Our firm’s Ventura wrongful termination lawyers bring over two decades of expertise, successfully representing both employees and employers in a wide array of employment litigation and trials.

Our Ventura wrongful discharge lawyers understand the significant stress and uncertainty that accompanies wrongful termination.  Our Ventura unlawful termination lawyers are prepared to provide you with the guidance and support you need during this challenging time. Our team of Ventura employment lawyers has a solid track record of advocating for our clients’ rights and achieving favorable outcomes in unlawful termination cases.

Whether you believe you were wrongfully fired due to discrimination, retaliation, or violation of your rights under state or federal laws such as the California Family Rights Act (CFRA), our Oxnard wrongful termination law firm is fully prepared to fight for your rights. Our unjust firing lawyers strongly believe that everyone deserves fair treatment in the workplace, and we will work tirelessly to ensure that justice is served.

With our extensive experience and dedication to protecting employee rights, you can trust our team of wrongful termination lawyers in Ventura County to navigate the complexities of wrongful termination law on your behalf. Our goal is not only to secure justice for you but also to provide you with peace of mind during this challenging period.

If you’re ready to take action and seek justice for your wrongful termination, don’t hesitate to reach out to our Ventura wrongful job termination lawyers for a comprehensive evaluation of your case. Our wrongful termination attorneys in Ventura are committed to standing by your side every step of the way and fighting relentlessly to protect your rights and interests.

Wrongful Termination Attorneys in Oxnard Ready to Fight for Your Rights

Our Ventura wrongful termination law firm extends a complimentary case evaluation to thoroughly discuss the specifics of your situation and to determine the most appropriate course of action for you. Our primary objective is to offer you peace of mind and the legal representation that you rightfully deserve. There’s no need to delay in seeking justice for your wrongful termination. Contact us today to arrange your consultation and to embark on the initial steps towards safeguarding your rights.

Our Ventura Wrongful Firing Lawyers Can Help With your Wrongful Discharge Case

The termination of one’s employment can be deemed unlawful in numerous ways. A claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy can stem from a variety of public policies, resulting in various ways a termination can be considered “wrongful” under the law.

There exists a multitude of scenarios where termination may be unlawful, including but not limited to discrimination based on protected characteristics such as race, gender, age, or disability, retaliation for whistleblowing or reporting illegal activity, refusal to participate in illegal activities, taking legally protected leave, or exercising rights granted by employment contracts or collective bargaining agreements.

Given this broad scope, a termination can be wrongful not just because of the act of termination itself, but also due to the reasons behind it. If an employer fires an employee for reasons that violate public policy, such as those outlined above, it constitutes wrongful termination. These violations undermine fundamental principles of fairness and justice in the workplace, and the law provides avenues for employees to seek recourse when such actions occur.

Wrongful Termination Resulting from Complaint about Non-Payment of Wages

The prompt payment of wages due to an employee, as required by Labor Code section 216(a), is not only a fundamental public policy of this state but also serves the broader interest of the public at large, extending beyond the individual employee to whom the wages are owed.

Ensuring timely payment of wages is crucial for maintaining economic stability and fairness within the workforce. When employees receive their wages promptly, they can meet their financial obligations, support themselves and their families, and contribute to the local economy. This, in turn, fosters a healthier and more vibrant community.

Moreover, prompt payment of wages reflects the state’s commitment to upholding principles of fairness and equity in employment relationships. It demonstrates respect for the labor and contributions of workers, regardless of their position or status within the workforce.

By prioritizing the timely payment of wages, California reinforces its dedication to protecting the rights and well-being of workers, which ultimately benefits society as a whole. It promotes stability, trust, and productivity in the labor market, contributing to the overall welfare and prosperity of the state.

Therefore, ensuring prompt payment of wages is not merely about fulfilling the obligations to individual employees but also about upholding the public interest and the core values of fairness, equality, and economic stability that underpin our society.

Wrongful Termination Resulting from Testimony at Hearing

Labor Code section 230(b) expressly prohibits discrimination or termination based on an employee’s lawful absence from work to appear in court as a witness, provided reasonable notice is given to the employer This statutory protection serves to uphold the integrity of the legal system and ensure employees can fulfill their civic duties without fear of reprisal.

Public policy is further violated when an employer retaliates against an employee for testifying at an unemployment compensation hearing. This action undermines the fairness and integrity of the unemployment compensation process and contravenes the fundamental principle that individuals should be able to participate in legal proceedings without facing adverse consequences in their employment.

These protections against retaliation for participating in legal proceedings are integral to preserving the rights and liberties of employees. Such actions by employers not only intimidate employees from exercising their legal rights but also erode public trust in the judicial system.

Moreover, wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, commonly referred to as Tameny claims, encompasses situations where an employer terminates an employee for reasons that contravene public policy. In the context of Labor Code section 230(b), Tameny claims arise when an employer unlawfully retaliates against an employee for participating in legal proceedings, including court appearances and unemployment compensation hearings.

Call Our Oxnard Employment Lawyers for a Free Consultation

This area of employment law underscores the importance of protecting employees from retaliation and discrimination based on their exercise of legal rights. Employees who face wrongful termination in violation of public policy have legal recourse to seek damages and remedies for the harm caused by their employer’s unlawful actions.  Understanding the complexities of unlawful termination law requires expertise and experience. If you believe you have been wrongfully terminated, it is crucial to seek legal advice to explore your options and protect your rights.

Areas Served:

The litigation and trial attorneys of the Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C. provide services throughout Southern California including but not limited to AdelantoAgoura HillsAlhambraAliso ViejoAltadenaAnaheimApple ValleyArcadiaArletaAtwater VillageAzuzaBakersfieldBaldwin ParkBanningBeaumontBellBell GardensBellflowerBeverly HillsBlytheBoyle HeightsBreaBrentwoodBuena ParkBurbankCalabasasCalimesaCamarilloCanoga ParkCanyon LakeCarsonCathedral CityCerritosChatsworthChino HillsChinoClaremontCoachellaColtonComptonCosta MesaCoronaCovinaCulver CityCypressDana PointDesert Hot SpringsDiamond BarDowneyDuarteEagle RockEast HollywoodEast Los AngelesEastvaleEcho ParkEl MonteEl SegundoEl SerenoEncinoFontanaFountain ValleyFullertonGardenaGarden GroveGlassell ParkGlendaleGlendoraGranada HillsHacienda HeightsHawthorneHemetHesperiaHighland ParkHighlandHollywoodHollywood HillsHuntington BeachHuntington ParkIndian WellsIndioInglewoodIrvineJurupa ValleyLa Canada FlintridgeLa-Crescenta MontroseLa HabraLa MiradaLa PalmaLa PuenteLa QuintaLa VerneLaguna BeachLaguna HillsLaguna NiguelLaguna WoodsLakewoodLake BalboaLake ElsinoreLake ForestLancasterLawndaleLincoln HeightsLoma LindaLong BeachLos AlamitosLos AngelesLos FelizLynwoodManhattan BeachMar VistaMaywoodMenifeeMission HillsMission ViejoMonroviaMontclairMontebelloMonterey ParkMoorparkMoreno ValleyMurrietaNewbury ParkNewhallNewport BeachNorcoNorth HillsNorth HollywoodNorthridgeNorwalkOntarioOrangeOxnardPacific PalisadesPacoimaPalos VerdesPalmdalePalm DesertPalm SpringsPanorama CityParamountPasadenaPerrisPico RiveraPlacentiaPomonaPorter RanchRancho CucamongaRancho MirageRancho Santa MargaritaRedondo BeachResedaRialtoRiversideRosemeadRowland HeightsSan BernardinoSan ClementeSan DimasSan GabrielSan FernandoSan JacintoSan Juan CapistranoSan PedroSanta AnaSanta ClaritaSanta MonicaSawtelleSeal BeachShadow HillsSherman OaksSilver LakeSimi ValleySouth El MonteSouth GateSouth PasadenaSouth WhittierStantonStudio CitySun ValleySunlandSylmarTarzanaTemeculaTemple CityThousand OaksToluca LakeTorranceTujungaTustinTwentynine PalmsUplandValenciaValley GlenValley VillageVan NuysVenturaVictorvilleWalnutWest CovinaWest HillsWest HollywoodWest Puente alleyWestchesterWestminsterWestwoodWhittierWildomarWinnetkaWoodland HillsYorba Linda

Featured Wrongful Termination Case:

Galeotti v. Int’l Union of Operating Engineers Loc. No. 3, 48 Cal. App. 5th 850 (2020)

In Galeotti v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 3, the California Court of Appeal addressed a case involving allegations of retaliation and violation of public policy within a labor union context.

The plaintiff, Galeotti, was employed by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) as a track maintenance engineer and was a member of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 3 (IUOE Local 3). Galeotti raised concerns about what he perceived as unsafe working conditions at BART, particularly relating to track maintenance and electrical safety issues. He reported these concerns to BART management and also raised them within his union, IUOE Local 3.

Following his complaints about safety issues, Galeotti experienced alleged retaliation from both BART and his union. He claimed that BART subjected him to negative performance evaluations, increased scrutiny, and hostile treatment. Additionally, Galeotti asserted that IUOE Local 3 failed to adequately represent him and discriminated against him because of his safety complaints.

Galeotti filed a lawsuit against both BART and IUOE Local 3, alleging retaliation and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. He argued that his termination was a result of his advocacy for safety, which is a fundamental public policy concern.

The Court of Appeal considered whether Galeotti’s claims against both BART and IUOE Local 3 were valid. The court found that Galeotti’s complaints about unsafe working conditions and his efforts to improve safety at BART were protected activities under California’s labor laws. Employees have a legal right to raise concerns about workplace safety without facing retaliation.

Regarding BART, the court determined that there was sufficient evidence to support Galeotti’s claim of retaliation. The court concluded that BART’s negative treatment of Galeotti following his safety complaints constituted unlawful retaliation in violation of public policy.

Regarding IUOE Local 3, the court found that Galeotti’s claims of inadequate representation and discrimination required further examination. The court noted that unions have a duty to represent their members fairly, and discrimination against members for engaging in protected activities, such as advocating for workplace safety, would violate public policy.

In summary, Galeotti v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 3 addressed issues of retaliation and violation of public policy in the context of workplace safety. The case underscored the importance of protecting employees who raise concerns about safety in the workplace and reaffirmed that such actions are protected under California law. The court’s decision highlighted the responsibilities of both employers and unions to ensure that employees are not subject to retaliation or discrimination for exercising their legal rights.


I agree to receive SMS messages from Akopyan Law FirmI agree to receive email(s) from Akopyan Law Firm