La Puente Employment Lawyers

The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. is prepared to advocate vigorously for the rights of employees in La Puente who are facing discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, or any other unlawful conduct in the workplace. Additionally, we are equipped to offer practical and cost-effective solutions to employment law issues for small businesses in La Puente. Our team’s extensive experience in handling employment disputes from both the employee and employer perspectives provides us with valuable insight into the strategies and tactics used by opposing parties. This deep understanding allows us to develop effective and tailored legal strategies that maximize the chances of achieving the best possible outcome for our clients. Whether you are an employee seeking justice for workplace violations or a small business in need of guidance on employment law matters, the Akopyan Law Firm is here to assist you. We are committed to providing high-quality legal representation and solutions to clients in La Puente. Please don’t hesitate to contact us if you require legal assistance or advice related to employment law.

About La Puente, California

La Puente is a City located in the San Gabriel Valley which is home to more than 50,000 residents.  It covers approximately three and a half square miles and encompasses the following zip codes: 91744, 91746, and 91747. La Puente is primarily a residential community (70%) with multiple types of businesses located primarily along major highways and streets. Industrial land use is less than five percent (5%) of the City’s 3.5 square mile land area. The City’s rural community is preserved by a well-defined general plan.  The City of La Puente is a general municipal city incorporated on August 1, 1956. The City’s name “La Puente” means the bridge in old Spanish and refers to an early bridge built across the San Jose Creek by members of the Portola-Serra expedition in 1769, as they surveyed the region for Spain. A modernized version of the bridge can be seen in the City’s colorful seal. The community of La Puente began in 1841 when European settlers arrived by wagon train from New Mexico and obtained title to the large 48,000 acre Rancho La Puente. During the 1930’s, the area was famous for its fruit and walnut groves. The largest walnut packing plant in the world was located in the City. The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. is headquartered in Los Angeles which is minutes away from La Puente.  Thus, our lawyers stand ready to serve employees and employers in La Puente with all their employment law needs.

Your Search For The Best La Puente Employment Attorneys Is Over

Finding the right labor lawyer in La Puente is indeed a crucial decision, and it’s essential to choose an attorney who will prioritize your best interests. The Akopyan Law Firm A.P.C. is dedicated to achieving the best possible outcomes for each client, regardless of the complexity of the case or the level of effort required. Our commitment to quality work, personalized service, and passionate advocacy has led to excellent results for our clients. We understand that every employment law case is unique, and we tailor our legal strategies to suit the specific needs and goals of our clients. If you seek out the best wrongful termination lawyers in La Puente give us a call to see what we can do for you.  If you’re seeking an employment lawyer in La Puente, we encourage you to reach out to us for a complimentary case evaluation. During this consultation, you can discuss your situation, and we can provide you with guidance on how we can assist you in pursuing your legal rights. Your satisfaction and success are our top priorities, and we look forward to serving you.

We Can Help La Puente Residents With All Sorts of Employment Disputes, Including Those Which Involve:

Featured Employment Case

This was an important case in which the California Supreme Court recognized that there is a strong public policy favors full and prompt payment of wages due an employee. The Court’s opinion states in relevant part that “it has long been recognized that wages are not ordinary debts, that they may be preferred over other claims, and that, because of the economic position of the average worker and, in particular, his dependence on wages for the necessities of life for himself and his family, it is essential to the public welfare that he receive his pay when it is due.”  In reaching this conclusion the Court examined several other cases:  California courts have recognized the public policy in favor of full and prompt payment of wages due an employee. In 1918, the court in upholding the constitutionality of the penalty wage law stated: ‘Delay of payment or loss of wages results in deprivation of the necessities of life, suffering inability to meet just obligations to others, and in many cases may make the wage-earner a charge upon the public.’ (Moore v. Indian Spring, etc., Mining Co., 37 Cal.App. 370, 379-380, 174 P. 378, 381.) More recently, this court in an opinion which held the misdemeanor penalty for the wilful failure to pay wages constitutional, observed that ‘It has long been recognized that wages are not ordinary debts, that they may be preferred over other claims, and that, because of the economic position of the average worker and, in particular, his dependence on wages for the necessities of life for himself and his family, it is essential to public welfare that he receive his pay when it is due. (Citations.) An employer who knows that wages are due, has ability to pay them, and still refuses to pay them, acts against good morals and fair dealing, and necessarily intentionally does an act which prejudices the rights of his employee. Such conduct amounts to a ‘case of fraud’ within the meaning of the exception to the constitutional *327 prohibition and may be punished by statute.’ (In re Trombley, 31 Cal.2d 801, 809-810, 193 P.2d 734.) Still another expression of this state’s concern for the workers who form such a large part of our population is found in People v. Vandersee, 139 Cal.App.2d 388, 390-391, 294 P.2d 77, 79, wherein the court said: ‘And legislation which is enacted with the object of promoting the welfare of large classes of workers whose personal services constitute their means of livelihood must certainly be regarded as of direct and vital concern to every community and as calculated to confer direct or indirect benefits upon the people as a whole, thereby coming within the proper exercise of the police power, seeking as it does to promote ***497 **25 the welfare of a large class against a real and existing danger. * * * “* * * The prospective employer and the applicant for employment, who is usually dependent on his own earnings for the support of himself and his family, do not deal on an equal footing.”