Colton Employment Attorneys

Our knowledgeable labor law attorneys are prepared to enforce and protect the rights of Colton residents.

About Colton

Colton is city located in San Bernardino County.  Colton covers sixteen square miles.  It is home to roughly 54,000 residents.  Colton lies within zip code 92313 and 92324.

The history of the area now known as the City of Colton dates back over 300 years, serving as a vital crossroads and regional hub. In the late 1700s, Mexican explorers made their way north to Monterey, passing through this very region. It wasn’t until the early 1800s that the first permanent settlement took shape, with the establishment of the Jurupa and San Bernardino ranchos, Mexican land grants to private landowners. These ranchos played a crucial role in supporting agricultural activities that were essential to the growing region. Over time, the ranchos were subdivided, giving rise to smaller ranches and citrus orchards that dotted the landscape.

In 1875, the completion of the Southern Pacific Railway’s final transcontinental leg on its journey to Los Angeles led to the formal layout of a town on a traditional grid street pattern. This layout still characterizes Colton’s downtown and the south Colton neighborhood located south of Interstate 10. The railway and citrus orchards brought a surge of activity to Colton, making it a thriving community with numerous businesses and residents working to support railroad operations. In south Colton, where many railroad workers resided, homes were constructed using disassembled wooden crates from railroad shipments.

Colton’s significance as a transportation hub continued to grow, with both east-west and north-south regional railway lines intersecting in the city. As the citrus industry declined, other businesses dependent on rail for materials and shipments established themselves along the railway lines, creating vast industrial areas, many of which remain operational today. The original residential settlements remained closely tied to the rail and industrial activities, allowing local residents to easily commute to work.

Numerous historic buildings in downtown and south Colton stand as a testament to these early years. The Colton Museum, situated on La Cadena Drive and constructed in 1891 as a Carnegie Library, proudly showcases and recounts the influences that have shaped the modern Colton we see today.

After a relatively quiet period during the 1920s and the Great Depression, Colton experienced another surge of development. The construction of Interstates 10 and 215 through the city, solidifying its role as a crossroads community, attracted transportation-based industries. Following World War II, a frenzy of residential construction occurred, and several decades later, explosive subdivision growth.

How Colton Residents Can Find The Best Employment Lawyer

Colton residents have various avenues to find an attorney. They can seek recommendations from friends and family, conduct online searches like “wrongful termination attorney Colton,” or consider reaching out to billboard lawyers. Regardless of the chosen method, it’s crucial to ensure that the potential attorney possesses the necessary experience, skills, and a proven track record to deliver the best results.

The Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C., is conveniently located with offices in Riverside, Orange, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles, just minutes away from Colton. Our employment lawyers have nearly two decades of experience and a strong history of success in handling employment law cases for both employees and employers. We prioritize quality over quantity and are committed to providing exceptional legal services.

Whether you’re an employee seeking legal assistance or an employer in need of legal guidance, our experienced employment lawyers are prepared to offer Colton residents world-class legal representation and top-notch services.

We Can Help Colton Residents With:

Featured Employment Case

Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth (1998) 524 U.S. 742

Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth was a significant United States Supreme Court case that addressed the issue of employer liability in cases of sexual harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The key facts of the case are as follows: Kimberly Ellerth, the plaintiff, worked for Burlington Industries. She alleged that her supervisor, Theodore Slowik, had sexually harassed her on numerous occasions. Ellerth did not suffer any tangible employment actions as a result of the harassment, such as being fired, demoted, or having her pay reduced. However, she argued that she had been subjected to a hostile work environment due to the harassment. Burlington Industries argued that they should not be held liable for Slowik’s actions because they had established an anti-harassment policy and complaint procedure, which Ellerth had not used. The central issue before the Supreme Court was whether an employer could be held vicariously liable for the actions of a supervisor who created a hostile work environment without taking tangible employment actions against the employee.

In its decision, the Supreme Court established a framework for employer liability in cases of supervisor harassment under federal law. The Court held that when a supervisor’s harassment results in a hostile work environment, and no tangible employment action is taken against the employee, the employer may be held liable. However, the employer has an affirmative defense available if it can show two elements: 1. The employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct the harassing behavior. 2. The employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of the employer’s preventive or corrective measures. This case is significant because it clarified the standard for employer liability in sexual harassment cases under federal law. It emphasized the importance of employers having effective anti-harassment policies and complaint procedures in place, and it highlighted the duty of employees to utilize these resources if they are available. It has had a lasting impact on how sexual harassment cases are handled in the workplace under Title VII.  It is critically important to note that the analysis under state law is not the same.