Top Employment Lawyers in Woodland | 1 available

1 Employment lawyers are available in Woodland, California, including James Chisholm Ashworth. These lawyers are rated between 4.8/5 to 5.0/5 and 57% provide free consultation.

James Chisholm

View Profile

Avvo Rating:

James Chisholm Ashworth

725 Main St Ste 230 , Woodland , California 95695

Practice Areas: Employment

Describe Your Case — We'll Connect You With a Matching Lawyer

Save This Search

Recent Q&As in California (Employment)

Can i sue my employer for sharing confidential private information with somebody who was an employee at the time as well ? | Aug 26, 2026 | Sourced from Reddit
Location: California I was wondering if there was anything I can do legally . Let me start off by saying I work at a very high-school like environment. Bullying , hostile work environment faced with retaliation if spoken up about. 2 years ago I went to my boss when I first found out I was pregnant to let him know that it was high risk and I would be having a lot of appointments .. giving him a heads up about my situation... a couple days later I ended up having a miscarriage. Called him let him know , he gave me leave for the time that I needed . After my time was up went back to work , still faced bullying ,spoke up , nothing was done , stayed quiet . 1 of the employees there who made the job hard with the constant bullying and talking crap also happenes to be very good friends with my boss outside of work . Months later I find out he told that same employee what had happened to be because when he heard him and I quote " talking a lot of shit about you" he said he replied with "dont be mean to her , she just lost a baby" after that. That same employee told a few other employees there and I became the subject of conversation. Its been very stressful, and I can honestly say its been emotionally damaging . I was wondering if there's anything that…
Is my company discriminating against pregnant women? (CA, USA) | Aug 25, 2026 | Sourced from Reddit
Location: California, USA Hi all, in the state of California, you are considered disabled at 36 weeks of pregnancy. I had an approved disability claim with the state of California with paperwork from my doctor stating my disabling condition was pregnancy. I filed paperwork with my work for a pregnancy disability claim and twice they denied my short term disability leave stating “being 36 weeks pregnant is not sufficient information. your doctor must provide specific information as to why you cannot work”. To get the documentation exactly how they wanted I would need to schedule an appointment and tell my doctor what to write on the form which didn’t seem right to me either. Going back and forth and going to my doctor was frankly exhausting especially when the baby was expected any day at that point so I told them to forget it and I would take unpaid pregnancy leave. I find it seriously legally questionable that the state of California could find me disabled but my work (or rather the 3rd party representing my work) said I was not disabled and refused my claim. I spoke to other women and they experienced the same. They were not paid disability until the baby was born. Are pregnant women being denied disability illegally? or is this something my work is able to do? I live and work in California, the other women I asked live and work in California. Thank you in advance.
California payroll issue: missed paycheck, $2,000 Zelle, and incorrect final paystub — what should I do? | Aug 24, 2026 | Sourced from Reddit
I recently left my MDS LVN position at a SNF due to management is really bad and I feel sorry for the resident that is currently admitted. My agreed rate was $52/hr. Payroll schedule was 1st–15th paid on the 25th, and 16th–end of month paid on the 10th. I worked 40 hours from 7/27–7/31. My iSolved account wasn’t set up correctly, so I completed a paper timecard and gave it to the facility administrator. The administrator was the person responsible for entering my hours into iSolved. Those July 27–31 hours should have been paid on 8/10, but I received no paycheck. On 8/3, I reported COVID exposure, worked about 3 hours, was sent home, then tested positive. I did not work [8/4–8/12](tel:8/4-8/12) while isolating unpaid since I’m new. After following up about the missing 8/10 paycheck, I spoke with my administrator demanding my check so my administrator sent me $2,000 via personal Zelle on 8/13 as advanced since he admitted that he deaden a mistake and did not process my hours. No paystub was provided for the Zelle payment. At the time I understood it to be connected to the missed payroll. Now that I’ve left, he was asking me for the $2,000 back and he says it was his personal money to help me with rent. I dispute that characterization and I also have the texts/Zelle record that indicated that money was sent to cover his mistakes from the corporate HR but he did not expect that I would…
21, first job in California employer made this 2-year non-compete a condition of employment. Is this legal? | Aug 23, 2026 | Sourced from Reddit
Location: California I’m 21 and this is my first job in California. When I was given my employment contract, I was also given this separate non-compete agreement and told it was part of what I needed to sign for the job. I’ve heard they are illegal now. For more context,I’m an hourly, at-will employee in a real estate/property-management support role. I’m fine with reasonable confidentiality and trade-secret protections, but this seems extremely broad. Is this legal in California? And what rights do I have if signing this was made a condition of employment? Should I just sign and deal with it later? NON-COMPETE AGREEMENT This Non-Compete Agreement (this “AGREEMENT”) is made _________ by and between [COMPANY], (the “COMPANY”) and [EMPLOYEE] (the “EMPLOYEE”). WHEREAS, the parties hereto recognize and agree that the services of the Employee are special and unique and that he/she has special fiduciary duties to the Company as an Employee; WHEREAS, for the foregoing reasons, a covenant on the part of the Employee not to compete during his employment and for a reasonable period after the termination or expiration of his/her employment is essential to protect the business of the Company; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by the Company and the Employee as follows: 1. NON-COMPETE. During the period of the time that the Employee is employed by the Company and for a period of two (2) years after the termination or cessation of employment for any reason (both periods of time, taken together, being referred to…
Wage Theft in San Francisco and my Options? | Aug 23, 2026 | Sourced from Reddit
Location: San Francisco, CA i live and work remotely in San Francisco for a corporation based in SoCal (but recently moved its HQ to another state for tax reasons but idk if that's relevant) and have been on-call 24/7 (not allowed to leave the house at all unless I'm going somewhere with secure wifi because I handle medical data) every 4-6 weeks (108 hours a week) for the past six years. I have been desperately asking my now-former manager about standby or on-call pay the entire time because I have never received it and he and our CIO ignored me completely until I was being moved to a new team with a new manager and he finally told me to ask HR. To be fair, I should have thought to do that myself, but I have had only negative experiences with HR thus far. After SEVERAL months of requesting updates and sending case after case of the exact same complaint that went to the California Supreme Court and did NOT find in the company's favor, HR got back to me that I was indeed correct and am owed three years of backpay (the statue of limitations for wage theft is three years) but it's been over a month since I was notified and whenever I request an update of when I can expect said backpay and how much it will be, I am told it's "still in the works." I am concerned that they are trying to wait out the…

See more Q&A Ask a Lawyer (free)

You have reached the Last Page!

Disclaimer: This content is based on aggregated public information and estimated market trends. It is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.