The award, to be presented at ERA’s luncheon on June 13, 2013, is given annually to a social justice advocate who embodies ERA’s mission to fight for women’s equality. This year’s luncheon focuses on issues of equal pay and wage justice, and marks the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act.

Jayaraman is a founder and co-director of Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, a non-profit social justice organization that seeks to improve working conditions for food service workers. In February, Jayaraman published Behind the Kitchen Door, an exposé on poor working conditions in America’s restaurants.

“ERA’s fight for gender justice at work could not happen without visionary partners like Saru Jayaraman,” said ERA Executive Director Noreen Farrell. “Her incredible efforts on behalf of restaurant workers have exposed injustices faced by far too many low wage workers served by ERA. We honor the tireless advocacy of Saru and her colleagues at ROC for standing up to ensure that workers are paid fairly, are safe from harassment, and receive leave time when critical to their health or the health of their families. We thank Saru and ROC for helping us build a movement that promotes gender equity and justice for all workers.”

The United States food service industry employs 10 million workers, of which less than one percent are unionized, according to ROC-United. In Behind the Kitchen Door, Jayaraman combines personal narratives and investigative journalism to explore the “dark side of dining out”: discriminatory labor practices, exploitation, and unsanitary kitchens.

A graduate of Yale Law School and a frequent public speaker on the topic of low wage earners’ rights, Jayaraman currently serves as Director of Food Research at the University of California, Berkeley.

For more information on ERA’s luncheon, or to buy tickets, visit events.equalrights.org. To learn more about ERA’s campaign to Close the Wage Gap, click here.

Ms. Ledbetter is known nationwide for her groundbreaking sex discrimination case against her former employer, Goodyear Tire. The litigation inspired  the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, signed into law in 2009. Ms. Ledbetter is the author of Grace and Grit, a memoir of her struggle against pay discrimination. Ms. Ledbetter will be signing copies of the book after the luncheon.

Additionally, workers’ rights advocate Saru Jayaraman, co-founder of Restaurant Opportunities Center United (ROC), will receive ERA’s Champion of Justice Award. Ms. Jayaraman, who in February published Behind the Kitchen Door: The People Who Make and Serve Your Food to rave reviews, is a tireless advocate of wage justice and fair treatment for low wage workers.

ERA has taken on the cause of pay equity in the halls of Congress, supporting the pending Paycheck Fairness Act, and in the courts.  ERA’s attorneys are among those representing plaintiffs in Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., filed on behalf of a putative class of thousands of  women who work at Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club stores in California. Later this month, plaintiffs will argue a motion to certify the class before Judge Charles Breyer in the Northern District of the U.S. District Court. Plaintiffs allege systemic discrimination against women in compensation and promotions at the two chains of stores.

This year’s luncheon theme, Close the Wage Gap, will focus on narrowing the disparity in pay between men and women across industries, as well as opening up access to jobs in traditionally male-dominated industries like science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).  Learn more about ERA’s Close the Gap campaign at http://www.equalrights.org/era-launches-close-the-gap-campaign-for-equal-pay/.

“The gender wage gap infects women in every profession, age bracket, educational level, and income,” said ERA Executive Director Noreen Farrell.  “It results in women losing hundreds of thousands of dollars by the end of their professional lives.  ERA is committed to ending pay secrecy that keeps women in the dark about their wages and underpaid.”

More than 800 individuals, including prominent ERA supporters, attorneys, business leaders, civil and women’s rights advocates, and elected officials will be in attendance at this highly anticipated annual event. Sponsors include Wells Fargo, Hanson Bridgett LLP, Farella Braun + Martel LLP, and the Kazan McClain Satterley Lyons Greenwood & Oberman Foundation, and many more.

Funds raised from the Luncheon are vital to ERA’s work. This includes ERA’s hallmark precedent-setting litigation, legislative advocacy toward better protection of women’s rights, and the operation of a national toll-free Advice & Counseling Hotline, which receives more than a thousand calls annually from women and girls seeking legal assistance.

Sponsorships and tickets to the luncheon are available now. Please go to events.equalrights.org for more information.

“The women who first brought this case have waited over 12 years to have their claims heard. Without a class action, their rights cannot be vindicated,” said Renick. “It is time that the merits of their claims against Wal-Mart are heard in court.”

The case, filed on behalf of Wal-Mart employee Betty Dukes and others, began in the same U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, in June 2001 when the plaintiffs brought suit against Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club, a division of Wal-Mart, alleging pay and promotion discrimination. The District Court certified the national class in 2004, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court decision on class certification in 2010.  Wal-Mart appealed the Ninth Circuit’s ruling to the Supreme Court, which reversed the decision in June 2011.

The current case for class certification is “markedly different” from the case that went to the Supreme Court in size and scope, according to plaintiffs’ counsel Christine Webber, of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC. “We are asking the District Court to grant certification of these narrower classes based on our conviction that they are in full compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court’s new guidelines for class actions in employment discrimination cases.”

The classes include only women who were subject to pay and promotion discrimination at 250 Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club stores in two California Wal-Mart regions and one California Sam’s Club region from 1998 through 2002. The case excludes women who worked as store managers or pharmacists during that time period as well as any claims for promotion into co-manager or store manager positions.

“When low-wage women workers come together as a class, they have a better chance at getting equal pay and advancing at their jobs.  That is why the brave women of Wal-Mart have filed this case,” said plaintiffs’ counsel Noreen Farrell, executive director of Equal Rights Advocates (ERA).

In addition to past evidence of pay and promotion discrimination, attorneys for the plaintiffs also submitted substantial new evidence, including the declarations of more than 80 women charging pay and promotion discrimination, new testimony and documents specific to the California regions concerning pay and promotion practices, and a new analysis showing statistically significant patterns that women fared far worse in pay and promotions than their male counterparts in the California regions.

Named California plaintiffs include current Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., workers Betty Dukes, a 19-year employee who works at a cashier/greeter in a Contra Costa County Wal-Mart, and Christine Kwapnoski, a 27-year employee who works as an assistant manager in a Contra Costa County Sam’s Club, a Wal-Mart division. Also named are former employees Edith Arana, of Los Angeles County; Deborah Gunter, of Riverside County; and Patricia Surgeson, of Sacramento County — all of whom worked at Wal-Mart stores in California.

A hearing on the motion for class certification before the District Court in Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., is expected in July 2013.  For more information about the case, visit www.walmartclass.com.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., plaintiffs are represented by Hadsell Stormer Richardson & Renick LLP, Pasadena, Calif.; Impact Fund, Berkeley, Calif.; Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC, Washington, D.C.; Equal Rights Advocates (ERA), San Francisco, Calif.; Davis Cowell & Bowe, LLP, San Francisco, Calif.; and the Law Office of Sheila Thomas.

                                                                                                                                Contact:

Editor’s Note: Copy of motion, plaintiffs’ profiles                              Pam Avery

and interviews  available                                                                              Pavery@conoverandcompany.com

402-305-0799

“It is imperative that we fill the gaps in existing laws so that women receive equal pay for equal work,” stated Noreen Farrell, Executive Director of Equal Rights Advocates. Farrell made her comments today at an event in San Francisco also featuring House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Congressmen George Miller and other advocacy groups and workers celebrating passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.

Four years ago today, President Obama signed the Ledbetter Act into law to ensure that the time limit for bringing pay discrimination claims would renew with each discriminatory paycheck (rather than be tied to when the employer first started discriminating). But in an economy where women earn, on average, 77 cents for every dollar men earn, and women on color fare far worse, with African American women earning 64 cents and Latinas 55 cents for each dollar earned by a white man, the fight for pay equity is far from over. The Paycheck Fairness Act updates and strengthens the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and would give women the tools they need to challenge this prevailing (and embarrassing) wage gap.

As co-counsel representing plaintiffs in Dukes v. Wal-Mart, the class action lawsuit addressing discriminatory pay practices by the nation’s largest retailer, Equal Rights Advocates is deeply committed to achieving wage justice for working women. The Paycheck Fairness Act would help by clearly prohibiting pay secrecy policies that are currently imposed by many employers and were faced by the plaintiffs in the Wal-Mart case, along with many other low wage workers. Pay secrecy policies prevent employees from gaining information necessary to enforce their rights to earn equal pay for equal work, and the Paycheck Fairness Act would help eradicate such policies.

The wage gap results in thousands of dollars in lost income for America’s women and families each year. It hurts women, their families and our economy. Equal Rights Advocates urges the passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act to help working women achieve wage justice. It is time for the administration and Congress to take action to advance this important goal.

Contact: Noreen Farrell, Executive Director, nfarrell@equalrights.org
Work (415.575.2398); cell (510.701.8243)

About ERA: Equal Rights Advocates (ERA), founded in 1974, is a national civil rights organization dedicated to protecting and expanding economic and educational access and opportunities for women and girls. Through its campaign approach—incorporating public education, legislative advocacy, and litigation—ERA seeks to assist women and girls throughout a life-long continuum: ensuring equality in their educational experience, combating sex discrimination in the workforce, and advocating for workplaces hospitable to working families. To learn more about ERA’s work, visit www.equalrights.org.

Confirming California’s role as a leader in protecting the rights of working pregnant women, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission’s (FEHC) revised pregnancy regulations were approved on November 30th.

When these regulations become effective on December 30, 2012, they will clarify the legal requirement that employers provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant women, such as chairs, frequent bathroom breaks, and assistance with heavy lifting. While a 1999 amendment to the Fair Employment and Housing Act required employers to provide these accommodations, updated regulations were needed to conform to these statutory changes.  In 2011, the law was amended again to compel employers to continue workers’ health insurance during pregnancy disability leave.

The new regulations provide helpful guidance to employers and employees about safeguards for pregnant women in the workplace.  Providing these accommodations is the responsibility of employers and can be critical to the well-being of workers. For example, Laura worked as a program counselor at a facility for people with disabilities. During her pregnancy, on her doctor’s advice, she asked to be relieved from bending and twisting when securing wheelchairs to a bus. Her employer refused, forcing her onto unpaid leave and threatening to fire her if she did not return in four months. The four-month deadline coincided with her due date. Once a legal advocate informed Laura’s employer of their obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation under the law, Laura was reinstated, paid back wages, and given the modification she needed.

But many pregnant workers do not realize they are entitled to these accommodations and do not seek legal help. The revised regulations will make it clearer to employers and employees alike that pregnant workers are fully protected in the workplace.  In addition to explaining an employer’s duty to provide reasonable pregnancy accommodations and to continue health benefits during pregnancy leave, the final FEHC regulations also

• clarify that it is unlawful for an employer to require a pregnant woman to take a leave of absence when she has not requested leave;
• explain that employers must provide lactation accommodations to nursing mothers;
• list examples of conditions that entitle a woman to take up to four months of job-protected pregnancy disability leave, including gestational diabetes, loss or end of pregnancy, and post-partum depression; and
• describe an employer’s obligation to grant extended leave beyond 4 months if an employee has a qualifying disability under the FEHA.

A coalition of women’s and civil rights organizations* provided essential comments and testimony on the proposed regulations during a two and a half year period, and helped ensure that the final regulations provide the protection to pregnant workers that the Fair Employment and Housing Act mandates. The coalition applauds the approval of the regulations, and looks forward to seeingimproved employer compliance with the Act.

Noah Lebowitz, Board Member of coalition member California Employment Lawyers’ Association said:  “This is a great day for all Californians.  The clarity provided by these regulations will empower working pregnant women to know and exercise their rights and will simultaneously provide an easy-to-understand guide for employers to comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act.  The result will surely be an increase in employment and a reduction of litigation.”

According to Sharon Terman, Senior Staff Attorney at the Legal Aid Society–Employment Law Center, “California has long been a leader in providing broad protections for working pregnant women. We are thrilled that the final regulations reflect the intent of the law and confirm these basic rights.”

Jennifer Reisch, Legal Director at Equal Rights Advocates, noted that, “Allowing valuable employees to continue working throughout their pregnancies whenever they can makes sense for families andbusinesses.  We are very pleased that these regulations uphold the letter and spirit of California’s pregnancy accommodation law.”

The following organizations gave input and helped shape the revised pregnancy regulations:

• American Association of University Women–California
• California Commission on the Status of Women
• California Employment Lawyers Association
• California Women’s Law Center
• California Work and Family Coalition
• Center for WorkLife Law, UC Hastings
• Equal Rights Advocates
• Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center
• Women’s Employment Rights Clinic of Golden Gate University Law School

The action follows on the heels of a troubling report by the investigative unit of NBC Bay Area on October 30, 2012, which revealed widespread ignorance of and non-compliance with basic requirements of Title IX among 200 Bay Area schools, including its requirement that schools designate a “Title IX coordinator” to receive and investigate and act upon sex discrimination and harassment complaints. The investigation reveals that principals at some Bay Area schools were unaware of Title IX and could not identify the school’s Title IX coordinator or if the school even had one. See the complete NBC Bay Area video report: “Bay Area Schools Ignoring Title IX?”

Equal Rights Advocates Executive Director Noreen Farrell commented: “Ignorance of Title IX’s basic requirements by school leaders forty years after its passage is shameful and it is hurting girls. Equal Rights Advocates hears from students and parents across California and the country who don’t know their rights, and have no idea where to turn when they face sexual harassment or other discriminatory treatment at school.”

In response to the disturbing results of the NBC investigation, Equal Rights Advocates is filing formal Public Records Act requests with over 100 school districts in the Bay Area requesting documents that evidence or describe their efforts to comply with Title IX, including the identity and contact information for their Title IX coordinators, any written policies and procedures relating to compliance with Title IX, documents relating to Title IX training programs, and the districts’ responses to any Title IX complaints that have been filed over the last three years (redacting any personal information to protect the privacy of those who are involved.)

“Our goal in collecting this information will be to identify gaps in Title IX compliance and to encourage San Francisco Bay Area school district officials to take immediate steps to bring their districts into compliance,” said Farrell. ERA Legal Director Jennifer Reisch added: “ERA intends to enforce Title IX. Millions of girls depend on it.”

About ERA: Equal Rights Advocates (ERA), founded in 1974, is a national civil rights organization dedicated to protecting and expanding economic and educational access and opportunities for women and girls. Through its campaign approach—incorporating public education, legislative advocacy, and litigation—ERA seeks to assist women and girls throughout a life-long continuum: ensuring equality in their educational experience, combating sex discrimination in the workforce, and advocating for workplaces hospitable to working families. To learn more about ERA’s work, visit www.equalrights.org.

Contact:
Pam@turnerstrategies.com
402-305-0799

Equal Rights Advocates Executive Director Noreen Farrell available for comment
nfarrell@equalrights.org; 510-701-8243

(SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. – Sept. 22, 2012) A federal court has given the plaintiffs in the California-focused Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., lawsuit the green light to proceed with their gender discrimination class action against the giant retailer.

In rejecting Wal-Mart’s motion to dismiss the case, Judge Charles R. Breyer, of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, yesterday upheld the plaintiffs’ right to proceed as a class and present evidence that Wal-Mart and its subsidiary Sam’s Club discriminated against its California region female workers in pay and promotion.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs argue that the amended class action, filed in U.S. District Court in October 2011, is in full compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court’s new guidelines for class actions in employment and discrimination cases. Those guidelines arose from the Supreme Court’s decision in the Wal-Mart v. Dukes decision.

“We have maintained all along that the Supreme Court’s decision did not preclude us from seeking justice for the women of Wal-Mart through class actions consistent with its new guidelines and standards, nor did the Court rule on the merits of the case,” said lead counsel Brad Seligman, of the Impact Fund. “This decision vindicates our argument.”

Plaintiffs’ counsel Noreen Farrell, executive director of Equal Rights Advocates, adds: “The women of Wal-Mart have been waiting for more than a decade for their day in court. Sex discrimination in pay and promotion hurts lives and families. We applaud the decision giving our clients the green light to prove their claims.”

The case began in the same U.S. District Court in June 2001 when the plaintiffs brought suit against Wal-Mart on behalf of a nationwide class of female workers alleging pay and promotion discrimination. The District Court certified the national class in 2004, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court decision in 2010. Wal-Mart appealed The Ninth Circuit’s ruling to the Supreme Court, which reversed the decision in June 2011.

Plaintiffs’ co-lead counsel Joseph Sellers, of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC, states: “We have strong new evidence that Wal-Mart has a long and egregious history of pay and promotion discrimination throughout its California stores. We welcome the opportunity to present this evidence to the Court.”

Relying on well-documented discrimination in pay and management promotion practices, the named plaintiffs represent more than 100,000 current or former women employees—with the exception of store managers and pharmacists— of California Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club stores. The class includes women who worked at Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club stores and were subject to pay and promotion discrimination at any time since Dec. 26, 1998.

Named California plaintiffs are current Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., employees Betty Dukes, an 18-year employee who works at a cashier/greeter in a Contra Costa County Wal-Mart, and Christine Kwapnoski, a 26-year employee who works as an assistant manager in a Contra Costa County Sam’s Club, a division of Wal-Mart. Also named are former employees Edith Arana, of Los Angeles County; Deborah Gunter, of Riverside County; and Patricia Surgeson, of Sacramento County — all of whom worked at Wal-Mart stores in California.

Judge Breyer set a hearing for Feb. 15, 2013, on the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.

In addition to the case before the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, another case class action pay and discrimination case against Wal-Mart, Odle v. Wal-Mart has been filed in a federal court in Texas, and other regional cases are expected to be filed elsewhere in the nation this year.

For more information on the case, visit www.walmartclass.com.

Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., plaintiffs are represented by the Impact Fund, Berkeley, Calif.; Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC, Washington, D.C.; Equal Rights Advocates (ERA), San Francisco, Calif.; Davis Cowell & Bowe, LLP, San Francisco, Calif.; and the Law Office of Sheila Thomas.

Earlier this year in conjunction with the introduction of the House version of the bill, ERA released a ground-breaking report highlighting the importance of the new law for working women and their families. Entitled Expecting a Baby, Not a Lay-Off: Why Federal Law Should Require the Reasonable Accommodation of Pregnant Workers, the report traces 12 years of success of similar legislation in California. The report is available online at http://www.equalrights.org/media/2012/ERA-PregAccomReport.pdf.

“Working families need and want to keep working. ERA strongly supports the PWFA because similar protections under California law make the case for federal change,” said Noreen Farrell, ERA’s Executive Director. “Pregnant women are working with accommodations. Businesses are benefitting from happy and productive long-term employees. It is a win-win.”

To hear the stories of pregnant workers and the simple accommodations that they need but are denied at work, read The Refusal to Accommodate Pregnant Workers: Real Accounts of the Devastating Consequences for Workers and Their Families, compiled by a coalition of national women’s advocacy organizations and Equal Rights Advocates.

About Equal Rights Advocates
Equal Rights Advocates (ERA), founded in 1974, is a national civil rights organization dedicated to protecting and expanding economic and educational access and opportunities for women and girls. Through its campaign approach—incorporating public education, legislative advocacy, and litigation—ERA seeks to assist women and girls throughout a life-long continuum: ensuring equality in their educational experience, combating sex discrimination in the workforce, and advocating for workplaces hospitable to working families. To learn more about ERA’s work, visit www.equalrights.org.

La primera clínica va a ser el miércoles, el 5 de septiembre en el cuarto Audre Lorde del Edificio de Las Mujeres, ubicada en la vecindad de La Misión de San Francisco. La clínica continuará desde las seis de la tarde hasta las nueve de la noche. Las cuatro organizaciones proveerán consejería individua a mujeres que han sido víctimas del acoso o abuso sexual en el trabajo. Los servicios incluirán una evaluación legal y referencias a abogados privados, ayuda con aplicaciones de la visa U, y reclamos de compensación de trabajadores. Además que la ayuda legal, una persona con cita en la clínica recibirá información para asesoramiento psicológico. La clínica tendrá abogados y defensores bilingües.

Personas interesadas en asistir a la primera clínica el 5 de septiembre deben de llamar al (415) 575-2385 para hacer una cita. Aunque preferimos citas, personas sin cita todavía son bienvenidas.

“El abuso sexual en el trabajo de mujeres inmigrantes es un problema que se ha empeorado en los Estados Unidos. Hay varios obstáculos, incluyendo el miedo de represalias, que disuadan a mujeres de buscar ayuda,” dice Monali Sheth, abogada de ERA. “Clínica La Voz es un lugar donde mujeres se pueden sentir seguras en afirmar sus derechos contra el abuso sexual en el empleo.”

“Nuestra meta es proveer a las mujeres inmigrantes de San Francisco, incluyendo a las que están indocumentadas, con la información y apoyo que necesitan para protegerse y sus familias y para reafirmar sus derechos,” dice Nicole Márquez, abogada de WorkSafe.

La segunda clínica va a tomar lugar en el 7 de noviembre en el mismo lugar. Además de los servicios comprensivos de Clínica La Voz, la clínica también ofrecerá una serie de talleres de “conocer sus derechos” sobre el acoso sexual durante el empleo y como aplicar por el remedio migratorio de la visa U. El taller siguiente de “conocer sus derechos” va a ser el 3 de octubre.

ERA está dedicada a la causa de terminar el maltratamiento de las trabajadoras inmigrantes. Recientemente, ERA, con abogados de Talamantes Villegas Carrera LLP, ganaron un veredicto de $812,000 de parte de una portera hispanohablante. El jurado declaró que la mujer fue abusada sexualmente por su supervisor, y que su empleador había tomado represalias contra ella cuando reportó el abuso.

Para mujeres quienes no podrán asistir a la clínica en persona, ERA tiene una línea telefónica bilingüe de asesoría y consejería donde una persona que está siendo acosada sexualmente en el trabajo o en la escuela podrá obtener ayuda legal. El número de la línea telefónica es 800-839-4372.

Media Contact:
Monali Sheth, Equal Rights Advocates
msheth@equalrights.org 415-621-0672, x387 (office) 510-290-6544(cell)
ERA ha luchado por los derechos de mujeres y muchachas de manera nacional por más que 40 años por litigación, apoyo público, y por su línea telefónica de asesoría y consejería, que recibe miles de llamadas cada año.

“ERA is thrilled to have Jennifer as our new Legal Director,” said Noreen Farrell, Executive Director of ERA. “She has spent her career advocating for under-represented individuals and communities in class and individual cases. She is a well-respected leader in the legal community on issues of social justice and economic justice for workers. Jennifer will no doubt bring that same passion and dedication to ERA’s mission on behalf of women and girls.”

Jennifer comes to ERA after more than seven years with the law firm of Talamantes Villegas Carrera, LLP, where her work made a significant positive impact on the lives of thousands of marginalized workers, including many women facing sexual harassment and other unfair treatment on the job in a variety of industries across the state. In addition to her litigation work, Jennifer serves as an Adjunct Professor at U.C. Hastings College of the Law, where she has been teaching since 2009. Jennifer is a graduate of Yale University and the University of California at Berkeley School of Law. She is fluent in both Spanish and French.

“I look forward to channeling the skills and substantive knowledge that I have acquired my career towards maintaining and expanding ERA’s leadership role in the struggle to ensure that all women and girls can participate as full equals at all levels of society,” said Jennifer. “I am honored to join the dedicated, hard-working staff of this amazing organization, which has been at the forefront of the fight to eradicate institutional barriers to women’s and girls’ success since its inception.”

Jennifer has extensive class and individual case experience, representing monolingual Spanish speakers, low-wage immigrant workers, and other marginalized workers in a variety of industries. She has focused on issues of discrimination, wage theft, and other institutionalized forms of inequality and exploitation, obtaining many significant settlements as well as important victories at trial.

Most recently as a member of Talamantes Villegas Carrera, Jennifer served as co-counsel to ERA in Bojorquez v. ABM, a case brought on behalf of a monolingual Latina janitorial worker who was sexually harassed and assaulted on the job, and then retaliated against after she complained. The team achieved an $812,000 jury verdict in the client’s favor in May of 2012.

Jennifer is a founding member of the CELA Immigrant Rights Committee and is currently the co-chair of the CELA Wage and Hour Committee. She has also volunteered for years as a supervising attorney with the Workers’ Rights Clinic of the Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Center. She is a member of the Diversity Committee of the San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association and on the Advisory Board of the East Bay Community Law Center. Jennifer is a frequent speaker and has authored and edited several litigation manuals, articles, and other materials concerning the employment-related civil rights of immigrants and low-wage workers.

Media Contact:
Noreen Farrell, Equal Rights Advocates
nfarrell@equalrights.org 415-621-0672 (office)
ERA has been championing the rights of women and girls across the country for nearly 40 years through its hallmark precedent-setting litigation, its legislative advocacy for women’s rights, and its operation of a national toll-free Advice & Counseling hotline, which receives thousands of calls annually from women and girls seeking legal assistance.