He has lawyered up with Angela Alioto. I am still confused about the facts. In another story Ralph said his current contract was going to expire this coming November, in which case I don't know why KNBR didn't just endure him until November and then simply fail to renew him. Apparantly KNBR chose to fire him for cause now which puts the whole Americans with Disabilities issue into play.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_20402951/attorney-former-knbr-host-ralph-barbieri-wrongfully-terminated?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com

Well, Ms. Alioto gave up some leverage on settlement by going public with this. This would have to go through administrative remedies first (EEOC or California labor commission) anyway but now KNBR will have motivation to defend this all the way through to litigation (since the allegations are out).

Not a fan of Ralph at all, but it seems that KNBR did him wrong after being with the station for so long.

Don't know if his firing was just or not under the law but Ralph getting punked is well deserved. His was a total ass!

As a real estate lawyer, I have had more than my share of ADA cases that I need to work on with our Firm's employment types (also, due to my spine, I am now labelled "disabled" so its of personal interest). ADA cases typically turn on the ability of the employer/property owner, etc. to make reasonable accomadation (reasonable btw does not mean the employer, for example, has to take less quality work or spend a lot of money) and in the employment scenario, reason for termination (which may always not be what the employer initially says it is). If its a matter of weak ratings, the radio station probably wins. No way you can make reasonable accomadations for declining ratings, and lost ad revenues. If the ratings still were good, and management was pissed Ralph missed days or was late due to his health issue, its most likely Ralph has a good case. BTW, my experience is that you hear a lot of claims going both ways (pro employee and pro employer) in these cases that turn out to be BS when you actually look at the evidence and have depositions. So its likely to early to judge any lawsuit by what you hear or will hear in the news (assuming a lawsuit is even filed). Also, its not a given Ralph sues. If he says in litigation he could continue to work, he undercuts his ability to receive several benefits he might otherwise be entitled to, such as disability and insurance payments. I know Ms. Alioto is a strong litigator, but I hope she engages a disability expert if she doesn't have the background, since the issues typically are complex.

I Bear;737471 said:

---

Don't know if his firing was just or not under the law but Ralph getting punked is well deserved. His was a total ass!

---

These kinds of things come down to he said/she said and fact determinations. For instance, it is usually impossible to tell whether an employer fired someone truly because they were late or whether it was a pretext (a smokescreen) for discrimination against disability and/or age. That's why I think it was not smart for Ralph's attorney to go public (unless facts were already out) as that's one piece of leverage plaintiffs' attorneys have in that they can get some kind of settlement in exchange for this not getting out too much (so KNBR could save face and not be a company known to discriminate esp. against loyal employees).

KNBR, Lee Hammer, and that bunch are not bad people. However, Cumulus Media Partners, the owners of KNBR a a variety of other stations are pure sleaze.

Cumulus Media Partners just settled a class action claim for all account executives in the State of California for violating numerous labor laws related to unpaid expenses, overtime, and other issues.

I think Ralph will get a nice settlement out of this if nothing else.

Perhaps Ralph got fired for being a Raider hater, which in my book constitutes good cause per se. I believe there is a jury instruction that says that.

I have a bit of experience watching Alioto in action, as I was on a jury for an employment discrimination case she tried (and lost) a few years ago. I found her to be underwhelming, to say the least. Having said that, with the right case and the right jury, I can imagine her being fairly effective. In the case I watched, she had neither -- her case was very weak and she had the worst jury she could have had. She needed a jury of people suspicious of big companies and swayed by emotion; instead, she got a jury with an attorney, two scientists with PhDs, another juror working on his PhD and a retired cop.

I think if she puts Ralph on the stand the jury will award the station millions in recompense for hiring an idiot

bearister;737459 said:

---

He has lawyered up with Angela Alioto. I am still confused about the facts. In another story Ralph said his contract was up for expiration this coming November, in which case I don't know why KNBR didn't just endure him until November and then simply fail to renew him. Apparantly KNBR chose to fire him for cause now which puts the whole Americans with Disabilities issue into play.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_20402951/attorney-former-knbr-host-ralph-barbieri-wrongfully-terminated?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com

---

I do not hold either AA or RB in high regard. But in this case from what I read (granted, all hearsay) KNBR was just plain stupid.

A long time employee,
was told not to worry about the contract extension,
tells employer he has a medical disability as preface to "open and fair negotiations",
Then gets fired for what appear to be reasons not clearly spelled out.

If KNBR was fed up with RB (and who wouldn't be), KNBR knew that RB was a jerk and still kept him on for years after his being a jerk was public knowledge.

In these situations, you tell your client, wait for the contract to expire then don't rehire him. KNBR's attorneys fees in any lawsuit alone will probably equal the amount he would be paid during that 6 month period.

What did RB do, curse out his boss on the air?

86Oski;737500 said:

---

....instead, she got a jury with an attorney...

---

That can be a fatal error unless you, for some reason, know that the attorney is in the bag for your client.

bearister;737530 said:

---

That can be a fatal error unless you, for some reason, know that the attorney is in the bag for your client.

---

LOL...at the time, she was litigating against one of my partners in another case. I mentioned that fact during voir dire, thinking that would get me excused from jury duty. But she kept me on, even though she didn't use all of her peremptory challenges.

86Oski;737539 said:

---

LOL...at the time, she was litigating against one of my partners in another case. I mentioned that fact during voir dire, thinking that would get me excused from jury duty. But she kept me on, even though she didn't use all of her peremptory challenges.

---

Wow, you would think that you remaining in the jury may have been grounds for malpractice (esp. because your partner was opposing her on another case) or at a minimum something to be referred as an ethics/disciplinary violation.

KoreAmBear;737542 said:

---

Wow, you would think that you remaining in the jury may have been grounds for malpractice (esp. because your partner was opposing her on another case) or at a minimum something to be referred as an ethics/disciplinary violation.

---

Why is that not grounds for discipline? Unless you hate your partner.

68great;737513 said:

---

I do not hold either AA or RB in high regard. But in this case from what I read (granted, all hearsay) KNBR was just plain stupid.

A long time employee,
was told not to worry about the contract extension,
tells employer he has a medical disability as preface to "open and fair negotiations",
Then gets fired for what appear to be reasons not clearly spelled out.

If KNBR was fed up with RB (and who wouldn't be), KNBR knew that RB was a jerk and still kept him on for years after his being a jerk was public knowledge.

In these situations, you tell your client, wait for the contract to expire then don't rehire him. KNBR's attorneys fees in any lawsuit alone will probably equal the amount he would be paid during that 6 month period.

What did RB do, curse out his boss on the air?

---

From the ADA cases I have worked on is don't believe most of what you read initially from either side in the media or the complaint or answer. I hope Ralph does sue - it would be an interesting case to follow.

I have no comments on the facts as there really are very few, but I doubt Cumulus fails to have lawyers smart enough to do a clean legal firing.

Barbieri's recourse:

1) Barbieri went to USF, recieved a nickname given to him by longtime San Francisco Chronicle columnist Herb Caen, and many considered him an institution; and

2) Hiring Angela Alioto, born in San Francisco, California, who got her undergrad and law degree from USF. She was the President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and served for 8 years.
a) Her father was Joseph L. Alioto, the former mayor of San Francisco.
b) Her son, Joseph Alioto Veronese serves as a San Francisco Police commissioner.
c) Her neice, Michela Alioto-Pier served as a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. She was appointed to the Board of Supervisors by Gavin Newsom after he was elected mayor in 2003. Newsom himself was initially appointed to this seat by former mayor Willie Brown. She is the most recent member of the Alioto family to hold an elected political office in San Francisco.

Ooops, Cumulus stepped into San Francisco legal politics.

Simply weak. :p

CalReason;737593 said:

---

The only puzzling aspect of it all (so far) is that KNBR claims to have fired him for not fulfilling the most basic requirements of his contract (persistent tardiness?) but still offered Ralph the option to take on a 6 month contract with new terms yet same salary (but Ralph claims the terms included the option for KNBR to let him go after a month). Why claim you fired him for cause, and at the same time offering him payed employment.

---

Is this weird? I've known people who have done fine at their job but didn't get along w/ their employers, so the employer will offer them severance to quietly leave, and the severance goes for x months or they find a new job, whichever comes first. (The "we can stop paying you if we want" thing is a nasty twist, though.)

If KNBR offered Ralph another deal contemporaneous with firing him and he rejects it ( which he did) then he can get that offer of a deal into evidence at trial (including the fact they required him to sign a release of all claims). He will argue the offer of the deal was an acknowledgement of liability and KNBR will counter they only offered the deal to avoid incurring attorneys' fees defending a baseless wrongul termination suit. If the offer of a deal was made after he was fired and after Ralph threatened to sue, then it is a privileged settlement offer and inadmissible in evidence. If an employer is going to offer severance before the employee makes a claim it may be a good move not to ask for a release. Yes, the terminated employee may take the money and then sue the employer but they then run the risk looking like a douche to a jury and the employer can more effectively argue that the severance payment was made for altruistic reasons and no release was requested because the employer is confident it did no wrong. But once that employee makes a claim, no payment should be made without a release getting signed.

bearister;737619 said:

---

If KNBR offered Ralph another deal contemporaneous with firing him and he rejects it ( which he did) then he can get that offer of a deal into evidence at trial (including the fact they required him to sign a release of all claims). He will argue the offer of the deal was an acknowledgement of liability and KNBR will counter they only offered the deal to avoid incurring attorneys' fees defending a baseless wrongul termination suit. If the offer of a deal was made after he was fired and after Ralph threatened to sue, then it is a privileged settlement offer and inadmissible in evidence. If an employer is going to offer severance before the employee makes a claim it may be a good move not to ask for a release. Yes, the terminated employee may take the money and then sue the employer but they then run the risk looking like a douche to a jury and the employer can more effectively argue that the severance payment was made for altruistic reasons and no release was requested because the employer is confident it did no wrong. But once that employee makes a claim, no payment should be made without a release getting signed.

---

What percentage of these cases get to a jury. I'd say a fraction of a percent, I'd cover my ass and worry about trial strategy later.

On a side note, which Alioto is in a wheelchair...that could be effective at trial.

I believe the young lady in the wheelchair is Angela's cousin and she is the politician. She fell from a defective chairlift at Heavenly Valley when she was a teenager.

CalReason;737598 said:

---

He's a Warrior fan boy too, just as everyone here is an irrational Cal fanboy. .

---

You must be new in town.:p

bearister, I believe everything you say, mostly because the bear in your avatar picture looks so smart

in a large # of ADA cases, I echo what the lawyers on the Board have said about not believing anything you read about this case.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned: a plausible scenario is that Barbieri knew he was on thin ice w/ Cumulus (rumor is that his tardiness was due to alcohol), and he "informed" them about the Parkinson's in order to be able to claim discrimination when he was fired. This, too, is not uncommon (side note: I'm surprised he didn't claim disability due to alcoholism--I've heard that one as well).

On a different note: I met AA once when she was on the Bd. of Supes. In fact, she was President of the Board at the time. A dumber woman would be hard to imagine. Once, while she was acting Mayor, there was some kind of disaster (a gas explosion, IIRC) downtown w/ fatalities, etc. She gave an impromptu press conference at which she said, "Wow! Man, the devastation was like totally awesome!"