Employment Law Commentary - January 2005

Recently I tried a complicated disability discrimination case in a California state court. The client terminated a long-term worker, who was living with cancer, on the "strength" of a surveillance video, which purportedly showed the employee leaving work with a stolen product. The product consisted of two six-packs of soda. The client had a zero-tolerance-for-theft policy, and the plaintiff was terminated along with nine other offenders on the tape. The problem was that the portion of the video relating to the plaintiff was not altogether clear. Plaintiff claimed the video depicted him carrying loose bottles, which he had properly purchased from the vending machine.