Kathryn B. Dickson

Whether it’s fighting for two wrongfully terminated salesmen of a medical device company or for a sexually assaulted female fieldworker, Dickson believes in going after her cases with passion and hard work.

“When people are describing me they say, you’re really tough but you’re easy to get along with,” said Dickson, in the employment law field for more than 35 years. “You fight on the merits, but you try to work with opponents, the people under you.”

Dickson originally started out in environmental law, but cases involving sexual harassment of, and discrimination against, women at Chevron Corp. in the early 1990s put her on the employment law path.

“The sexual harassment case was a turning point,” Dickson said. “I really like people and like to help people. It’s one thing I liked about the employment side of things — the human drama.”

In April 2015, an arbitrator awarded just under $1.3 million to the fieldworker, an award that included $800,000 for emotional distress. Jiminez v. Reiter Berry Farms, M123180 (Monterey Super. Ct., filed May 14, 2013).

“My argument was that professional women who get sexually harassed have so many more resources to handle something like this,” Dickson said. “The female farmworker has far less resources, so why shouldn’t she get as much?”

The case is still ongoing in a way: The arbitrator issued an injunction to bring in an outside human resources monitor for two years to ensure the farm follows new policies. The company must file quarterly reports with the court.

“I can see that really a lot was accomplished in terms of education of employees and managers,” Dickson said.

And finally, the U.S. Supreme Court last October ended what Dickson calls “a long-running saga” — the medical device salesmen case — when it denied the company’s petition for certiorari.

In 2014, a federal judge vacated an arbitrator’s $5.4 million award to Dickson’s clients, ruling that the arbitrator had been biased. Dickson appealed. Ruhe v. Masimo Corp., 14-55556 (9th Cir., filed April 7, 2014). The appeals court reversed and reinstated the award. Shortly afterward, Masimo Corp. filed for cert — even though it had paid the award plus $800,000 in interest.

“The Supreme Court did the right thing, but we had to sweat from May to October,” Dickson said. “The whole case took six years. So much for fast and economical.”

— James Getz