San Diego Employment Law Attorneys
Employment Litigation in San Diego, California
San Diego is one of California’s largest and most diverse cities — a place where coastal beauty meets innovation and opportunity. With a population of over 1.3 million residents, San Diego serves as the economic and cultural heart of Southern California’s southernmost region. Its identity is shaped by a mix of industries that include defense, technology, healthcare, tourism, education, and biotechnology, each contributing to a workforce as varied as the city itself.
Founded in 1769 as California’s first Spanish mission and presidio, San Diego evolved from a small port and naval town into a major urban center by the twentieth century. It became a city of national significance during World War II, when the defense and shipbuilding industries expanded rapidly. Today, San Diego continues to thrive as a hub of research, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Its neighborhoods — from Downtown and Hillcrest to La Jolla, North Park, and Mira Mesa — each reflect a unique mix of history, culture, and business activity that makes San Diego both dynamic and distinctive.
Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C. represents employees and employers throughout the city of San Diego in all aspects of employment litigation. Our attorneys focus exclusively on employment law disputes and bring extensive trial experience to every case we handle.
Employment Law in San Diego
San Diego’s economy and workforce are among the most diverse in the nation. With employers ranging from global corporations to small family-owned businesses, the city is home to nearly every type of workplace imaginable. This diversity also means that employment disputes can arise in any industry and take many forms — from issues of wrongful termination or discrimination to disputes over wages, hours, or workplace conduct.
California’s employment laws are among the most comprehensive and employee-protective in the country. These laws establish detailed requirements for how employers must treat workers, compensate them, and address workplace problems. When those laws are violated — intentionally or unintentionally — litigation often becomes necessary to resolve the matter.
Akopyan Law Firm provides representation in employment litigation involving wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wage-and-hour violations. Our attorneys approach every case with preparation, professionalism, and purpose. We represent both employees and employers in courts throughout San Diego County and across California.
Representation for San Diego Employees
Employees across San Diego’s many industries — from healthcare and education to hospitality, manufacturing, and technology — work hard to support their families and build their careers. When they encounter unlawful treatment in the workplace, the consequences can be significant.
Akopyan Law Firm stands up for employees whose rights have been violated under California law. We handle cases involving discrimination based on race, gender, age, disability, or other protected categories; sexual or workplace harassment; retaliation for reporting misconduct; wrongful termination; and unpaid wages or overtime. Our attorneys provide strong advocacy, guiding clients through each stage of the litigation process with skill and determination. We understand the stakes involved in employment disputes and work tirelessly to secure outcomes that protect our clients’ interests and restore their confidence.
Employment Litigation for San Diego Employers
San Diego’s employers face an evolving and often challenging legal landscape. Businesses must navigate an extensive framework of state and federal employment laws that govern everything from hiring and termination to pay practices and workplace investigations. Even well-intentioned employers can find themselves defending against claims that carry serious financial and reputational risks.
Akopyan Law Firm represents employers in employment-related litigation throughout San Diego. We handle cases involving discrimination, retaliation, harassment, wrongful termination, and wage-and-hour disputes. Our attorneys have deep experience in courtroom advocacy and are equipped to defend our clients effectively in both state and federal courts. We focus on providing strategic, efficient representation that protects our clients’ interests and supports long-term stability for their businesses.
San Diego’s Economy and Workforce
San Diego’s workforce reflects the breadth of its economy and geography. The presence of major universities, research institutions, and biotech companies has made the city a center for science and innovation. At the same time, the region’s strong military and defense presence — including Naval Base San Diego, Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, and Camp Pendleton nearby — has shaped both its culture and its economy. Tourism, hospitality, healthcare, and education also play major roles in sustaining employment throughout the city.
This combination of industries creates a highly skilled, dynamic workforce. It also means that employment disputes in San Diego can vary widely — from executive-level contract issues to hourly wage claims and everything in between. Akopyan Law Firm has experience litigating across this full spectrum, offering representation that reflects both the complexity and diversity of San Diego’s workplaces.
Neighborhoods and Employment Culture
Each part of San Diego has its own economic identity. Downtown and the Gaslamp Quarter are home to businesses in hospitality, law, and finance. La Jolla and Sorrento Valley host technology and life sciences firms. Mission Valley, Mira Mesa, and Kearny Mesa anchor retail, manufacturing, and logistics sectors. Farther inland, communities like Rancho Bernardo, Carmel Mountain, and Poway contribute to the region’s corporate and technology base.
Employment issues in San Diego mirror this diversity — arising in restaurants and hospitals, laboratories and offices, classrooms and construction sites. Akopyan Law Firm’s litigation practice is designed to meet these wide-ranging needs with experience, insight, and adaptability.
Why Choose Akopyan Law Firm for Employment Litigation
Employment disputes require more than knowledge of the law — they demand strategy, persistence, and the ability to litigate effectively. Akopyan Law Firm brings all of these qualities to every case we take. Our attorneys are experienced trial lawyers who understand how to build strong cases, negotiate effectively, and present persuasive arguments in court.
Our firm’s sole focus on employment litigation allows us to dedicate the time, energy, and resources needed to deliver results. We represent employees seeking justice and employers defending their rights with equal skill, precision, and commitment.
Contact Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C.
If you are an employee or employer in San Diego facing an employment-related dispute, Akopyan Law Firm is ready to help. Our attorneys focus exclusively on employment litigation and have extensive experience handling cases throughout Southern California.
To discuss your case or schedule a confidential consultation, contact Akopyan Law Firm, A.P.C. today. Our team provides skilled representation and dedicated advocacy in every employment law matter we handle.
We Can Help San Diego Residents With Cases Involving:
Featured Article:
Wrongful Termination After Bodily Injury in California: Key FEHA Protections
📌 Key Takeaways If you were fired soon after a bodily injury, California’s FEHA may protect you. Here’s how to spot the issues and respond wisely: Disability-Based Firing Is Unlawful Under FEHA: Employers may not terminate you because of a physical disability, including temporary injuries that substantially limit major life activities. The Interactive Process Is Mandatory: Once an employer knows about your disability, they must engage in a timely, good-faith dialogue to explore reasonable accommodations rather than dismissing requests. Retaliation Is Prohibited: Penalizing or firing you for requesting accommodations, disclosing a disability, reporting discrimination, or participating in investigations can constitute retaliation under FEHA. Timing, Remarks, and Paper Trails Matter: Close timing to disclosure, discriminatory comments, sudden negative write-ups, and departures from policy may help establish a disability-related motive. Prepared, documented, and advised = stronger protection. For California employees recovering from bodily injuries and wondering whether a sudden termination crossed the line, these insights clarify core protections and what to discuss with an employment attorney. Losing a job after a bodily injury can be devastating. When termination follows soon after an employer learns of a physical disability —especially alongside remarks about health, ignored accommodation requests, or sudden performance write-ups—California’s FEHA may be implicated. In broad terms, the law generally provides that employers may not terminate workers because of a physical disability (see, e.g., Gov. Code § 12940). This overview helps readers recognize patterns that may indicate FEHA issues. It is not a step-by-step guide. For case-specific analysis, speak with a California employment attorney. What FEHA Generally Prohibits FEHA generally prohibits disability discrimination in employment (Gov. Code § 12940). Coverage includes private employers with five or more employees in California. A physical disability can include conditions that limit major life activities (e.g., walking, standing, lifting, bending, reaching). The concept may include: an actual disability, a record of disability, or being regarded as disabled. Temporary injuries may qualify when they substantially limit major life activities during their duration. Employer knowledge of functional limitations is often relevant to whether legal obligations are triggered (e.g., accommodation and the interactive process). Employer Conduct That May Indicate Problems The following indicators are illustrative, not exhaustive: Direct remarks about injuries, physical capability, or costs (e.g., “we need 100% healthy workers”). Close timing between disclosure of limitations or accommodation requests and termination. Sudden documentation of performance issues that begins only after injury disclosure. Departures from policy (e.g., skipping progressive discipline or applying standards inconsistently). Refusing to discuss accommodations or declaring “no accommodation available” without individualized assessment (see Gov. Code § 12940(n); verify current text). Example (hypothetical): A worker provides medical lifting restrictions. Within a week, the employer ends employment for “inability to meet job requirements” without exploring equipment, modified duties, or reassignment. Outcomes depend on facts and law; this example is for illustration only. The Interactive Process (Independent Obligation) California law expects a timely, good-faith interactive process to consider reasonable accommodations (Gov. Code § 12940(n)). A common structure is: Recognize limitations: Employer becomes aware of functional limits affecting... Read more
Wrongful Termination Due to Back Injury in California: Recognizing Potential FEHA and ADA Violations
📌 Key Takeaways When your livelihood is on the line, understanding how the law protects you is the first step toward safeguarding your rights. Know the Statutory Protections: California’s FEHA and the federal ADA prohibit disability-based terminations and require reasonable accommodations for qualified employees. Recognize Employer Obligations: Covered employers must engage in a statutorily mandated interactive process to assess and provide appropriate accommodations. Spot Red Flags Early: Sudden termination after disclosing a back injury or requesting accommodations may indicate potential statutory non-compliance. Industry Patterns Matter: Physically demanding sectors such as construction, healthcare, and manufacturing have documented histories of FEHA and ADA violations. Professional Guidance is Essential: Qualified legal counsel can evaluate specific facts, confirm statutory coverage, and determine potential claims. Knowing the legal framework empowers you to identify when your workplace rights may be at risk. In California, wrongful termination due to a back injury may indicate non-compliance with two complementary statutory frameworks—the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code § 12940) and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)—when an employer takes an adverse employment action that may be motivated by disability, denies reasonable accommodation, or fails to engage in the statutorily mandated interactive process. Recognition of these potential statutory violations depends on identifying the timing, context, and nature of the employment action in relation to disability status and essential job functions. Laws are subject to change; consult official statutory sources for current language. Statutory Coverage: Recognition, Not Procedure FEHA and the ADA operate together to prohibit discrimination against a qualified individual with a disability and to require reasonable accommodation to enable performance of essential job functions. Both statutes require a good-faith interactive process between employer and employee. When termination occurs soon after disclosure of a back injury or an accommodation request, the temporal proximity may be a factor suggesting possible non-compliance. Potential Recognition Cues in Back-Injury Contexts Indicators that may suggest a statutory violation include: Accommodation denial without individualized assessment: Employer rejects assistive devices, modified duties, or adjusted schedules without evaluating whether these changes would address limitations while maintaining essential functions. Failure to participate in the interactive process: No substantive dialogue or exploration of alternatives after disclosure of limitations. Adverse action closely following disclosure or request: Termination, demotion, or reduction in hours occurring shortly after a back-injury accommodation request. Inconsistent explanations that may suggest pretext: Shifting or conflicting reasons for termination when compared with prior performance records or treatment of similarly situated employees (comparators). Note: These are illustrative examples only and do not determine whether a legal violation exists. Lawful vs. Potentially Unlawful Conduct at a High Level Potentially compliant conduct may include: Temporary restructuring of marginal duties after mutual discussion about essential functions. Time-limited light duty supported by documented operational needs. Application of neutral attendance rules following accommodation discussions. Potentially non-compliant conduct may include: Blanket refusals to consider modifications. Termination immediately after receiving medical restrictions. Statements indicating reluctance to employ individuals with lifting limitations. Note: These distinctions are educational only and not a... Read more
The Interactive Process in California: What Employers Must Do When You Report Your Back Injury
📌 Key Takeaways When an employer ignores disability accommodation laws, knowledge and decisive action can protect your rights. Spot Early Warning Signs: Lack of response, delays, or superficial engagement after a disability disclosure often signals non-compliance with FEHA. Know the Legal Standard: California law, including CCR §11065(p), requires timely, good-faith communication between employer and employee to identify reasonable accommodations. Identify Common Failures: Blanket policy disqualifications, denial without undue hardship analysis, and premature termination of discussions can indicate unlawful conduct. Document Everything: Maintain detailed records of all requests, responses, and medical documentation to support a potential legal claim. Seek Immediate Legal Review: Contact an employment law attorney promptly to evaluate whether your employer’s actions violate FEHA requirements. Empowered awareness and swift consultation can be the difference between unaddressed harm and effective legal protection. When a California employee discloses a disability to an employer, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) requires that the employer engage in a timely, good-faith “interactive process” to explore reasonable accommodations. Under California law, including California Government Code § 12940 and California Code of Regulations, Title 2, § 11065(p), this process is a legally mandated, collaborative discussion. Section 11065(p) defines it as timely, interactive communication between employer and employee to identify effective reasonable accommodations — a standard all California employers must follow. Unfortunately, some employers fail to meet these obligations, resulting in situations that may require legal review. If you have concerns about your employer’s compliance, contact an employment law attorney to evaluate your case. Experiencing barriers to accommodations can be stressful and isolating, and professional guidance can help protect your rights. Recognizing When Employers Violate California Law Certain patterns may indicate an employer is not fulfilling FEHA’s interactive process requirements: No response to a documented disability disclosure such as back injury. Ignoring or delaying accommodation requests without valid reason. Unilateral decisions about work restrictions without discussion. Superficial acknowledgment of requests without genuine engagement. These scenarios may suggest potential violations. Whether they rise to actionable claims depends on the specific facts and context, which should be reviewed by a qualified attorney. Example (for illustration only): An employee provides medical documentation requiring reduced lifting duties. The employer neither responds nor discusses alternatives and later assigns tasks that exceed the restriction. This could indicate a failure to engage in the interactive process. Employer Legal Obligations Under FEHA California Government Code § 12940 outlines specific prohibitions against disability discrimination and mandates that employers engage in the interactive process when an employee requests accommodation. CCR Title 2, § 11065(p) emphasizes that the process must be timely and conducted in good faith, with active participation by both employer and employee. Common violations include: Treating accommodation discussions as optional. Workplace policies that discourage disability disclosure. Shifting the burden entirely onto the employee to identify accommodations. Denying requests without analyzing whether they cause undue hardship (defined as significant difficulty or expense). Determining whether an employer’s conduct breaches these standards requires fact-specific legal evaluation. Patterns That May Constitute FEHA Violations Employers who engage in... Read more
Wrongful Termination Compensation After a Back Injury in California
📌 Key Takeaways Feeling blindsided after a back injury and job loss? Know exactly where your rights begin and compensation could follow. Recovery of Economic Losses After Wrongful Termination: Lost wages, missed overtime, and lost benefits may be recoverable through specific legal frameworks under California law. Punitive Damages For Employer Misconduct: Awards of punitive damages above and beyond compensatory damages often involve intentional wrongdoing or reckless disregard by the employer. Litigation Costs Don’t Always Fall on the Worker: In many employment cases, attorney fees and expert witness costs may be recoverable if the employee prevails. Precise Documentation Powers Every Claim: Payroll records, HR emails, and employer policies are critical in building a strong evidentiary foundation. Prepared workers ask the right questions, document everything, and stay informed—clarity builds confidence. Employees in physically demanding work environments often confront not only physical recovery but also workplace retaliation or wrongful termination following a back injury. California law provides a framework of recoverable damages; each one serving a distinct purpose. Viewing these through a focused lens helps clarify potential avenues of recovery without promising any specific outcomes. Economic Loss: What It Represents Back pay and front pay damages involve wages, bonuses, commission, and other economic losses occasioned by the wrongful termination of employment or other legal violations. California’s Labor Code safeguards wage recovery, and the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) includes protections for economic losses tied to disability discrimination and wrongful termination. Evidence such as pay stubs, time records, and payroll statements often support damages calculations. Future earnings lost—known as front pay—reflect projected wages when reinstatement is impractical. These projections hinge on factors like age, transferable skills, career trajectory, and mitigation obligations. Economic expert testimony frequently plays a role in valuation, especially where industry-specific wage progression matters. Key civil law anchors include: The Labor Code, which underpins back-pay recovery. FEHA’s inclusion of economic damages where a wrongful termination occurs due to disability discrimination. Benefits and Ancillary Losses Beyond direct wage loss, termination may interrupt accrual of benefits—vacation, paid time off, retirement or pension contributions, stock options, health coverage, and seniority-based perks. These forms of compensation integrate into the broader economic loss assessment. Human resources records, plan statements, or benefit summaries typically document these losses. Punitive Damages: The Legal Prerequisites and Context California Civil Code § 3294 sets strict criteria for punitive damages, requiring evidence of malice, oppression, or fraud. Under FEHA, such damages may be claimed when disability discrimination involves intentional or recklessly indifferent employer conduct. The relationship between compensatory and punitive awards must respect proportionality and constitutional due-process boundaries. Examples that may demonstrate the required threshold include: Retaliation following an accommodation request. A cover-up of discriminatory policy. Repeated unlawful behavior despite prior legal awareness. Courts may consider: The severity and duration of misconduct. The employer’s financial capacity. Whether punitive awards serve both retributive and deterrent functions. Differences in liability between corporate entities and individual supervisors. Reinstatement; Equitable Relief Options FEHA provides for reinstatement when feasible. Reinstatement involves returning a former employee to an... Read more
Millions of Dollars Recovered For Our Clients
Check Out Our Case Results