Employment & Labor Insider

When people think of workplace lawsuits, they usually picture offices, factories, or retail spaces. Not private residences.

But a newly filed California lawsuit against Kylie Jenner, her company, and affiliated household staffing entities is a reminder that employment laws don’t always stop at the front gate.

The allegations

Angelica Vasquez is a Salvadoran woman and practicing Catholic who worked as a housekeeper at Kylie Jenner’s residences in Beverly Hills and Hidden Hills, California.

She recently filed suit, asserting a wide range of employment claims, including alleged discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wage-hour violations.

Ms. Vasquez alleges that she was treated as unwelcome by supervisors and other staff from the start of her employment. She claims she was given the most difficult and undesirable tasks, shut out by coworkers, and subjected to intimidation and demeaning treatment. She also alleges that supervisors, although not Ms. Jenner herself, mocked her accent, made derogatory remarks about her Catholic faith, and referenced her immigration status in intimidating ways.

She further claims that when she raised concerns internally to supervisors (again, not to Ms. Jenner herself), the situation did not improve. Instead, she alleges that her workload increased while her hours decreased, and that she was subjected to additional scrutiny and discipline. She ultimately resigned, asserting that the conditions had become so intolerable that she had no meaningful choice but to leave.

The lawsuit also includes a familiar collection of wage-and-hour claims, relatively common in California, including allegations of unpaid wages, missed meal and rest breaks, inaccurate wage statements, and unreimbursed expenses.

Ms. Jenner and the other defendants have not yet had a chance to respond to Ms. Vasquez's allegations.

Why this case sounds familiar (even if the setting doesn’t)

The setting may be unusual, but the legal issues are not. In fact, the case reflects several themes that repeatedly arise in employment litigation.

To start, the lawsuit does not name just one employer. In addition to suing Ms. Jenner, Ms. Vasquez has sued various corporate and staffing entities that allegedly played a role in her hiring, supervision, and issuance of payment. That raises the possibility of joint employment, a theory that can expand liability when multiple entities share, or at least appear to share, control over the terms and conditions of employment.

Ms. Vasquez also alleges that her complaints were ignored and that conditions worsened after she spoke up. Again, the defendants have not yet had the opportunity to respond. But that sequence, if proven, can form the basis of a retaliation claim even if the underlying allegations are disputed and eventually unsubstantiated.

Finally, one critical issue will be the way in which Ms. Vasquez’s departure is characterized. She was not terminated, but instead alleges she resigned because her working conditions became so intolerable that she had no choice but to quit. In other words, she has alleged that she was “constructively discharged.” Under California and federal law, a constructive discharge has the same legal effect as if the employee was out-and-out fired. Saying “I quit” does not necessarily resolve the question of whether the employee was “terminated” under the law.

Even (very) small employers may be vulnerable

Coverage under employment laws is often based on the number of employees that the employer has. Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and many other federal laws apply only to employers with 15 or more employees. It is fair to assume that, unlike the Jenner household, the majority of home employers will not be covered by federal employment laws.

But state law could be a different story. The California Family Rights Act, the Fair Employment and Housing Act, and the Pregnancy Disability Leave Law generally apply to employers with five or more employees, bringing many small employers within their reach. Even outside California, a number of states have lower (or no) coverage thresholds.

Thus, the Jenner lawsuit is a good reminder that some employment laws follow the employee, not the address. A Hollywood star and a gated driveway do not necessarily create a legal exemption, nor may a “home workforce” of only a handful of employees.