MLG Wins Retaliation Suit; Nets $90K Settlement for 3 Employees

LOS ANGELES - Nov. 4, 2014 - PRLog -- The offending party, a company that is an approved Ginnie Mae (Government National Mortgage Association) issuer, engaged in a series of retaliatory conduct directed against three female employees for their whistleblowing actions and their lawful exercise of California law’s protected activity. According to case files, the three employees involved were two team leaders and a funding supervisor.

In January 2013, the company’s trading volumes started to pick up as an end result of its venture with lenders institution. As a Ginnie Mae issuer, the company was authorized to package multiple federally insured or guaranteed loans and securitized into mortgaged-backed securities. However, in May 2013, the trading volumes began their decline. It was in this period that the plaintiffs were able to focus in doing quality control (QA). That time, they noticed red flags on trade files involving government-insured loans, indicating possible violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines.

The plaintiffs immediately informed company management about it, particularly their operations manager and the compliance counsel. They also requested from their operations manager and the company HR to address the issue of insubordination by the people in the company’s funding department who were the subjects of their QA. Apparently, as a result of their reports of violations and continued QA, the funders started to treat them indifferently.

To the plaintiffs’ surprise, the company deliberately failed to act on their reported concerns. Subsequent to their whistleblowing and engaging in a protected activity by lawfully performing their duties, the company retaliated against them, being targeted for enforcing a strict compliance on RESPA and HUD’s guidelines.

On July 15, 2013, the plaintiffs were individually summoned in a closed-door meeting by the company’s HR head and two of her assistants, in which they were each informed about an investigation being conducted on complaints made against them. Evidently, the alleged complaint was instigated by their continued opposition against company’s violation of the RESPA/HUD guidelines, as well as mortgage-related laws.

During those individual meetings, they specifically informed the HR head that the majority of the issues with the funding department were caused by the upper management’s sudden changes in its implementing policies which were done overnight without any prior notice. They also informed her of the operations manager’s failure to act on their concerns.

Immediately after the meeting, the operations manager started to further retaliate against the plaintiffs. She became extremely critical in observing their work performance, even reprimanding them for trivial things. In fact, on July 18, 2013, she summoned one of the team leaders and the funding supervisor in a meeting and castigated them for using “incorrect format” in sending e-mails.

On one occasion, she reprimanded the plaintiffs for holding off a lending company’s purchase with the company-defendant. Although they were able to explain that the purchase offer failed to comply with the existing company policy and conditions, the operations manager refused to accept their reasonable decision. It was apparent that she wanted the plaintiffs to circumvent existing policies without providing them a proper authorization to do so.

Ultimately, on August 2, 2013, the company wrongfully terminated the employment of the two team leaders. One of the team leaders filed for unemployment benefits against the company a day after her termination. A month later, the California Employment Development Department (EDD) confirmed her eligibility for unemployment benefits and found that the company did not have a “valid reason” for terminating her employment.

Meanwhile, the funding supervisor was demoted from her position three days after her co-workers were terminated. Subsequently, she was constructively terminated on November 5, 2013 due to the continued retaliation for her complaints, failure to remedy the situation, and justify or reverse her demotion.

It was evident in the foregoing that their whistleblowing actions and their continued exercise of their protected activity under California law were the determinative cause of the adverse employment action of the company. Because of this, they suffered, and continue to suffer, severe emotional distress, anxiety, and mental suffering.

Fortunately, they were able to seek the assistance of the highly-respectable employment and labor attorneys of MLG. Their competent representation and sound litigation skills resulted in a reasonable $90,000.00 settlement, which they were able to obtain on behalf of the employees.

This is not the first time that the Mesriani Law Group has delivered justice for employees who were victims of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. For more than 15 years, the law firm has successfully represented thousands of clients in a lot of employment and labor cases, making it one of the best law firms in Los Angeles, California.

http://www.mesrianilaw.com/