California Supreme Court Permits Illegal Workers To Sue and Collect Damages For Workplace Discrimination

The California Supreme Court has upped the ante considerably for employers that employ undocumented workers.  Earlier this summer, the California Supreme Court issued a ruling permitting these workers to sue for workplace discrimination and recover damages, even though they obtained the job in the first place by presenting falsified work authorization documents.

Background.  Vicente Salas applied for a job with Sierra Chemical Co using falsified papers.  He submitted a Social Security number and a resident alien card which did not belong to him and then signed his Form I-9 attesting to the authenticity of these documents under penalty of perjury. He also signed an IRS Form W-4 under penalty of perjury containing the same information. Sierra Chemical did not suspect that the documents were falsified.

Salas suffered some injuries at work, ultimately leading to a lawsuit against Sierra Chemical for disability discrimination on account of its alleged failure to accommodate his disability and for refusing to rehire him in retaliation for his having filed a workers compensation claim. 

During the lawsuit, Sierra learned of information suggesting that Salas was not authorized to work in the U.S., so it asked the court to dismiss his lawsuit. Sierra reasoned that since it could not have hired Salas in the first place, it ought not be subject to a lawsuit based upon the illegal employment.  The trial court agreed with Sierra Chemical and threw out the case.  When Salas appealed the dismissal, the Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court.

The California Supreme Court had an entirely different view of the matter. The Supreme Court ruled that Salas' illegal work status was not a bar to his bringing suit. However, the damages he could recover would be limited to the back pay he might have earned up until the date that the Sierra Chemical discovered his illegal work status. The Court did say that all damages might be lost if the behavior of the employee was "particularly egregious", but did not define the circumstances when that would happen. In fashioning its ruling, the Court said that if undocumented workers could not sue and collect damages, it would provide a motivation for unscrupulous employers to take advantage of the workers. 

Please call your contact at the Firm if you have any questions about this ruling and how it may affect a pending case involving your company. We are reachable at 818-505-3700 or on the web at www.brgslaw.com.

Richard S. Rosenberg and Stephanie Kantor