Hollywood Employment Lawyer

The Deadlines, Which Are Longer Than People Think

Discrimination, harassment and retaliation under the state's fair employment law start with the California Civil Rights Department, and you generally have three years from the last unlawful act to file an intake form. Not one year, which is what a great deal of older material still says.

To take a claim to court you need a right-to-sue notice from that department, and once it is issued you generally have one year to file suit. You can request the notice immediately, which closes the agency file without an investigation. The department's own guidance says that route is advisable only if you already have a lawyer.

Whistleblower and Labor Code retaliation run separately. A complaint to the Labor Commissioner is generally due within one year of the retaliatory act. A civil claim under the main whistleblower statute is generally treated as a three-year claim, although California's appellate courts have not settled the point, so that is one to check against your own dates rather than take from an article.

Unpaid wage claims run from one to four years depending on what is owed, and a wrongful termination claim in violation of public policy is generally two years.

You Do Not Have to Tell HR First

This is the most damaging misunderstanding in the area, and it keeps people quiet while their deadlines run.

No California statute makes an internal complaint a condition of being protected, and nothing requires one before you speak to a lawyer. There is a single real nuance: in some harassment cases an unreasonable failure to use an available internal complaint process can reduce what you recover. It does not remove the claim. That is a reason to get advice early, not a reason to stay silent.

The Harassment Standard, Stated Correctly

California uses severe or pervasive, not both together. A single incident can be enough to create a triable issue, and the law says expressly that these cases are rarely suitable for summary judgment.

Two further points that surprise people. You do not have to show your productivity dropped. And the harassment rules apply to employers of every size, including those with fewer than five employees, which is a large share of the production companies and venues around here.

What Working in Hollywood Changes

Very little about the law and a fair amount about the evidence. Short engagements mean fewer formal records and more of the story sitting in text messages and call sheets. Loan-out companies, payroll services and production entities mean the name on your paperwork is often not the business that controlled the work.

That last point matters practically. Working out who your employer actually was, as opposed to who issued the cheque, is frequently the first substantive question in a Hollywood employment case and it is not always obvious from the documents.

One jurisdictional note. Hollywood is part of the City of Los Angeles and its minimum wage and sick leave ordinances apply here. West Hollywood, a short distance west, is a separate city with its own wage ordinance and its own figures. Which side of the line the worksite sits on is a real question, not a pedantic one.

What to Bring

A dated timeline first, because it is the single most useful thing. Then your offer letter or deal memo, any arbitration agreement you signed, pay records, performance reviews, any written warnings, the termination correspondence, and copies of complaints you made.

Bring only what you are entitled to keep. Your own records and messages you were part of are one thing. Material taken from company systems you were not authorized to access is another, and taking it can damage the case you are trying to bring.

Where a Case Is Filed

A Hollywood employment case is heard downtown at the Stanley Mosk courthouse. Note that a West Hollywood case would go west instead, to Santa Monica or Beverly Hills, because it is a different city.

Legal Disclaimer

This page is provided by Etehad Law for general information only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. The attorney responsible for this communication is Simon P. Etehad, Esq. (California State Bar No. 186449), Etehad Law, Beverly Hills, California. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.