NOTE: Feminist Founders is a listener-funded podcast. Your contributions enable me to continue bringing you these important conversations. To support the mission, sign up for a paid Substack subscription at https://feministfounders.substack.com/ 

SUMMARY: Navruz Avloni, a formidable attorney defending civil rights across California, discusses her path from a childhood in communist Uzbekistan to litigating high-profile cases like Diaz v. Tesla, advocating passionately for victims of workplace discrimination. She shares insights on leaving a partnership to start her own firm, navigating a male-dominated industry with feminist values, and the complex impacts of the #MeToo movement on legal practices. Navruz’s story is not only inspiring but also a powerful call to challenge systemic injustices and transform the legal landscape.

Discussed in this episode:

• Why Navruz is a proud and passionate feminist
• How a childhood spent in communist Uzbekistan played a role in Navruz’s career choice
• Choosing to be a plaintiff’s lawyer vs. a higher-paid corporate defense attorney
• Working up to partner at a firm and then leaving to start her own firm
• How Navruz is bringing her feminist values into a male-dominated industry
• Why the legal industry, often deservedly, gets a bad reputation — and how Navruz is challenging those norms
• How the legal industry often creates burnout (and the tools Navruz employs to avoid it)
• Why the legal system is the center of a feminist future
• Why so few victims of workplace misconduct take their cases to court. 
• How the #MeToo movement did—and didn’t—change workplace lawsuits
• Bad apples vs. bad policies in workplace lawsuits
• How to avoid bad apples (and legal damages from them) in your own business
• Tips for avoiding common mistakes among even well-meaning employers
• The importance of doing your best to fix an employer mistake
• Why Navruz typically won’t represent plaintiffs against small businesses
• How being a first-generation American deepens Navruz’s appreciation for America’s legal system
• The role of law in politics and vice versa

Resources mentioned:

• Patrick Lencioni on healthy workplace cultures
• “Dream Big and Win: Translating passion into purpose and creating a billion-dollar business” by Liz Elting
• Empower Work

Becky Mollenkamp:

Hello, thanks for joining me.

 

Navruz Avloni:

It’s great to be here.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

And I’m hoping you can start by telling me and you said you have a strong opinion, so I’m very excited. I’m waiting with bated breath to hear about your relationship with feminism.

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think feminism is incredibly important. To me, feminism means opening opportunities for women. It’s giving them a voice at the table. It’s treating women equally. It’s essentially not being sexist. I think my relationship with feminism developed really early on. I still remember being about five or six years old and I had a younger brother and we were at some family gathering and we finished our meal, we both finished our portions and we’re both still hungry. And so the family member comes in and says, okay, well, we’re going to give this to your brother because he’s the boy. And I remember being crushed. I was like, that’s kind of unfair. You know, if she said it’s because he’s younger and needs to grow, like that would have sounded fair to me. But, you know, basing it on a gender to me came off wrong. And I was like, that’s not okay. You know, and so I think from early on, I had this kind of strong reaction to situations where it felt like women were not treated the same or were not respected the same or their lives weren’t valued equally. It’s sad, but my kids are seeing it still today. Like, you know, we were just traveling in Turkey and my daughter was so excited to go see a mosque. She’s really into different types of religions and exploring, and they wouldn’t let her in because she was a woman or a girl. And so she was so frustrated and she kept asking everybody, the security guard, why can’t I come in? Because you’re a girl. And she’s like, well, what’s the actual reason? And she didn’t get a good answer and it just frustrated her. So I think feminism is really important. I think it’s important to me because I think the reason I can vote today is because of feminism. The reason I can wear pants right now is because of feminism, right? And the reason I can expect or demand, I guess, equal pay, not always, sometimes they’ll have to fight for it, is because of feminism. And so I think given what I do and the type of profession I’m in, I think I would call myself a feminist.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Well you just mentioned equal pay and that is one of many things that fall under the type of law that you practice. What made you want to go into that type of law? Was it that five-year-old, you don’t get that extra serving, like the start of a lifelong concern about these sorts of issues, or what brought you to where you are?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think in part my grandma, my grandma was a very strong character. I grew up in Uzbekistan, which, even though it was communism at that time, women were still treated kind of very different from men. And she had this sense of righteousness and the sense of right and wrong. And she was just a very strong female. And so I think I had this strong sense of what’s fair and not. And when I saw something, I would call it out. Sometimes it got me in trouble. And I often found myself arguing, you know, during dinners, at families, with family members about certain concepts. And it was, I would say I was probably already like eight, nine, 10, and, you know, I think that’s when I realized, like, I want to use my, I guess, argument skills or whatnot, you know, to help others. And so I’ve always just been passionate. I love what I do. I can work. I have a problem. Indefinitely, just because I’m so passionate about advocating for fairness and for women to feel safe at work, and be given equal opportunities.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Well, and you could have gone the other way to represent the corporate clients because my guess is that pays more. You could probably have made a lot more money had you pursued a different avenue with law. I’m sure that there’s money to be made inside of the law that you’re doing, but I also imagine it’s not the most lucrative of all the ways you could practice law. So what was it that made you say, this is important enough to me? Or like, did you always know? 

 

Navruz Avloni:

Yeah, I remember the day actually, I moved to San Francisco for my husband. My first job was in Sacramento. And I recall I applied for numerous different jobs and I had a defense firm offer, of course, much higher than a plaintiff’s side offer. And I recall calling my mom. I was like, mom, you know, I, I don’t know what to do. I was at the defense side interview and the associate there, you know, I got to ask him questions and I asked him like, you know, what’s the most exciting case they’re working on. And one of the associates said, you know, I’m really excited, we just won this toxic tort case and there’s 12 plaintiffs who are claiming all these horrific things happen and they are physically injured. And we got the court, the case dismissed. And I was just, I was like, mom, there’s no way I’m going to be excited, as excited as he is doing this type of work. And so I was like, but at the same time, if I do plaintiff side work, the pay is less but I know I can work forever because I love it. It doesn’t even feel like work to me. And so my mom was the right person to ask. She said, do what you love. And so, and since then, I’ve been doing only plaintiffs side work.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

And when you started, you worked for law firms, and you had worked your way up to partner, which I’m outside of the legal industry, but from everything I’ve seen on TV, that seems to be the goal, right? The goal is work really hard, move your way up to partner, and then you will have made it. You did that and then left and then started your own firm after like a decade of working for other people. So what made you want to start your own firm?

 

Navruz Avloni:

It was definitely not always my plan. Although in hindsight, it’s funny. My husband says, I always saw you as a firm owner. I was like, what? I’m so conservative when it comes to risks in general. But I think there are a couple of factors. I loved the firm I was at. It’s an amazing firm. They have an amazing culture. I loved having the opportunity to help build it up into what it is today. But I think two things. The first thing is I was kind of disappointed to see that there aren’t as many female-led firms. And so I think I kind of was very interested for that reason to start my own firm, a firm that’s headed by females. Most of the, while we have much more diversity in the legal profession, it’s still most of the firms are headed by male partners. And so I wanted to kind of build one centered around female ownership. I think I also wanted to have an opportunity to try cases. Typically when you see trials, it’s still male partners being first chair. And usually their female partners being second chair, whatnot, with some exceptions. And you know, male partners getting these giant verdicts. And so I wanted to have a chance to be the first chair. And so I knew it would be much easier if I have my own firm because I can choose who is what chair. So I think that was the second reason. I really wanted to get more exposure to trials. And the third reason is actually I just wanted to do something new. I think when you do something for a long time, you get good at it, it becomes easy. And I just, I thought it was time for me to try to grow in a different area and practice different muscles, so.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

But you also said you’re not someone who is one to take a lot of risks and clearly starting your own firm is a big risk. What actually gave you the courage to take that big, scary action if that’s not how you maybe are normally wired to show up?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I don’t know. I actually don’t know. Something just flipped for me and I just woke up seeing things a little bit differently I guess.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

And you mentioned the legal industry, like a lot of industries, is still very male dominated and seems to be particularly rooted in traditional values, traditional business values, capitalist, you know, sort of patriarchal kind of values. How are you trying to change that? I know, obviously, just being a woman in charge of a firm is, in and of itself, a change to that. But what are the other ways that you’re sort of bringing your feminist values into how you run your business?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think I have a huge advantage in the sense that I work with a lot of women. Well, I do have numerous male clients who are also victims of some sort of sexual abuse, but given the type of area I’m in, I do end up working with a lot of women. I think it allows us to create a very solid professional bond. I love actually creating not only a bond in a sense of here’s information I need to win your case, but also knowing who they are. I enjoy going to my clients’ homes. I want to see where they live. I want to see what kind of environment they’re in. I want to see what they look like in life, because today everything is still done very much remotely—hearings, mediations—and there are some scenarios where you really don’t actually need to meet a client in person, because everything is remote. So I really like the fact that I can connect with some of my clients on a very different level because I am a woman. And I like creating that bond. I think boundaries are important, but I think having that bond where you see where your clients are coming from, who they really are, really helps shape a much more compelling story in any case.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

And especially in an industry that, as you, I’m sure know, is one of the most hated businesses there is. Every time there’s a list of the most hated professions, lawyers are right up there, right? Along with journalists, which is my own background, and politicians. So it’s not just lawyers, but they typically are one of those things that we think of as like, ugh, lawyers, right? And so I think part of that is that there’s this feeling of lack of humanity in the legal system. And so what you’re talking about with trying to bring some humanity into your work, that does feel very different to me. I’m curious, knowing I’m sure it’s not like I’m telling you something you don’t know that lawyers are not the most loved industry. What is your experience with the legal industry? 

 

Navruz Avloni:

Firms are very different from one another. I think some firms have a very strong culture of being progressive and some firms are very backwards. And honestly, I still remember my very first case that I worked on coming out of law school. The individual that picked up the phone on the other side said, Oh, you’re my granddaughter’s age, you’re younger than my shoes. I was just taken aback. And then, you know, and then he continued to make these side comments, which I thought were very unprofessional. And I remember going to Judith, she was an attorney in the nearby office. And I said, Judy, I feel really uncomfortable with these comments. They’re really uncalled for and unprofessional. So I’ve been ignoring them, but you know, I kind of want to put an end to it. And she’s like, no, he’s just intimidated. When they don’t have a good argument on their side and they have nothing else, they’re gonna try to find other ways to attack you. So yeah, I’ve come across comments that I feel like we’re ageist maybe or sexist in some ways, but I think they’re becoming more rare as I’ve myself gotten older, I guess. With respect to my interactions with firms, I think they vary greatly. Attorneys have a horrible reputation for being unresponsive. And I have to say, I deal with that on my end. I’m very OCD with responding to my email, which is a horrible trait to have, but typically a response comes in within a day, maybe sometimes a few minutes, on my end. But there are firms there where I’m waiting on a response for like two, three weeks. And I’m like, are you kidding me? And it’s very frustrating. And so I think, you know, one of the key things when choosing a lawyer is number one is not only look for, I guess it depends on which side you’re on, but not only look for what they can actually do, because some law firms advertise themselves as saying, oh, we’re trial lawyers. It’s like, how many trials have you tried? You know, but also seeing what their practices are like, what their communication style is like, what their tone is like, whether they, I mean, some firms, I’m not going to name firms, but there are some firms, the way they speak to their clients are very demeaning, you know, and these are plaintiff side firms. And it’s very sad because yes, most of us don’t get paid hourly by our client. Most of us get paid only if we win. But that’s no excuse for treating your clients in a demeaning manner, especially often because when you do win, you get a windfall in some cases. And so it’s because of those clients. And so I think one of the things that’s really at the heart of our firm is making sure that each client, regardless of their background, regardless of what they do for living, what their age is, you know, or any other, you know, protected class, like we treat them all with the utmost respect. I’ll treat a CEO the same way as I’ll treat somebody who might not have gone to high school. So I think that’s really important. And it’s sad to see because it’s actually some of the plaintiffs’ firms that I’ve seen where I don’t feel like that is always the norm. 

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

You talk about company culture. I think one of the things I’ve experienced in the online business space is I’ve met so many folks who are running coaching businesses or other types of online businesses who are former lawyers or as they sometimes call themselves recovering lawyers because they were in that industry and burned themselves out, or were burned out, because I think the industry has at least some track record of churn and burn of lawyers, of like these expectations that are something most people would not do well with, of incredible workloads, of just hours and hours, especially as you’re trying to work your way up to partner this heavy workload that just leads to burnout. Is that something you had experience with?

 

Navruz Avloni:

Yeah, I remember the day that I was preparing for a one giant motion. I called my husband on Monday and I was like, Greg, I’m not going to be home tonight. You’re going to have to put our kids to bed. And he’s like, sure. And, you know, at the time we had, I think our kids were maybe two and four. And then I remember calling him on Tuesday, not going to be home tonight again. I think I came home that Friday. I don’t think I took a shower that whole week. I stayed at the office and the reality is because we had limited capacity, there’s only so much you can do, but there’s a lot of work, and I wanted to win. I didn’t want to lose. And so a lot of times that’s, you know, and on a plaintiff’s side, there’s only so much capacity, so much, people you have that you can use for a project. And so, but as I’ve gotten more experience, I’d say I have really found the importance of boundaries and planning ahead. And I think those two concepts are really important, regardless of which profession you’re in. I think it’s very important to set specific boundaries. And I think, you know, when you’re new, you don’t know how long things take you. But by the time you’ve been doing something for five, even, you know, 10 years, it’s not an excuse. You shouldn’t know how long something is gonna take you. And you should set boundaries around other things to make sure you have the time. And so I think that’s one way that I’ve changed. You know, I have a motion due on Thursday, and I didn’t wait a week before to work on it. You know, now I started working much earlier and I have people to help me. I delegate. But yes, I think it’s a problem in the legal field. Burnout is very real, especially amongst associates who don’t always have a capacity or the ability to push back because they do think it will impact their growth in the field.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

That power differential thing, which we’re going to talk about some in the ways that you’re representing people. What does it look like for you as a boss, though? How are you trying to approach things differently in the way you’re running your firm that maybe has traditionally been done to help avoid the burnout piece for your not just you, but for your employees?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I’m in the process of building a team. So I’m not there yet, but I’ve definitely been reading a lot about setting up a good work culture. So Patrick Lencioni, I think I’ve read almost every book he has on building a healthy work culture, on how to find the right team members, on how to screen them from the very beginning. So although I’ve been around for a year, I’m in the process of building a team, which I know I’ll need..

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Well, it’s good that you’re thinking about it before you start, right? So that maybe you can make that difference. I feel I’ve spent a good amount of time now, like, not belittling the law, but talking about some of the reasons that industry is tough and maybe has not always had the best reputation. You obviously love the law because you’re doing this. And you’ve wanted to do this for a long time. So what is it that you love about the law? And more specifically, how do you think the legal system and the law can be part of a feminist future of changing the world for the better?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think it’s at the center of changing the world for the better and a feminist future. I think it is very much at the center of moving things forward. Of course, other branches are also important, but the judicial branch is pretty key because a lot of progress does happen through new decisions by courts. A lot of progress does happen when you have litigation from a jury. An individual might have been wronged in some particular way, whether it’s an equal pay act claim, whether it’s a sexual assault claim or a disability type of a case. They might have been wronged, but you know they’re told from the very beginning, we did nothing wrong. I’m sorry, your life might have been messed up or you might have been injured more or you might need therapy for the rest of your life. But they’re told from the very beginning, usually by whoever did this to them, that we’ve done nothing wrong. And so I think it’s a huge vindication when you have a jury say, no, that’s not okay. And sometimes I think there’s progress not only with case law itself, but also with being able to tell the jury a story, tell them about the client, tell them what should be the interpretation, I guess, of what the law is. And I think it’s very powerful because there is progress in that sense too, I think. In part, the progress is really based on the mindset, I guess, of the public, and we see it. We see it progressing in some cases, and in some cases, we don’t see it progressing, which is sad.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Your work is about helping people, like I said, who’ve been wronged by their employers. And you’re talking about all of these wonderful ways that can change things. It can be validating. It can change systems. When you hear about, when I think about all these potentially powerful outcomes from suing when I’ve been wronged, I think, oh yeah. And yet I know many people, many people, probably the majority of people, I would bet, who have been harmed in the workplace, never sue. I’ve been harmed in workplaces and I’ve never sued. And I have a feeling many people who are listening can relate to that. So what keeps people from suing and what actually makes some people feel like they can sue?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I was just reading the EOC mentioned that only 6 to 13% of, you know, workplace sexual harassment cases are actually reported. Majority actually don’t get reported. You know, I can’t speak for, of course, everyone, but based on what I’ve observed, I think there’s a… When you’re a victim of workplace misconduct, especially when it’s something like sexual harassment where there is a strong psychological component that’s also triggered by the conduct, I think it’s not easy. It’s a very difficult, I think, personal decision that people have to make because suing is just, you can say sue, but it entails a lot. There’s a lot that comes with it. Where do you start? Who do you find? How do I even get a lawyer? And so I think for somebody who doesn’t have a family member who happens to be an employment attorney, you know, it’s just, I think the lack of information about what resources there are, what the process is like. I think that the concept of potentially suing is just overwhelming. And I think that’s one of the reasons why people don’t come forward. And which is why typically, when I talk to potential clients, I go through the whole process with them. You know, I’m like, this is what the process entails and now you have to make a decision for yourself, whether you can go through the process, whether, and because in some cases they can, it could be triggering psychologically for them to even go through that process at that time. And so I think not having the information as you know, or lack of information is one of the reasons I think some people don’t sue. The second thing is a stigma attached with it, right? If you sue, you’re gonna, can you still stay in the company? Are people going to treat you differently? Do you have to lose your livelihood? How are your coworkers going to treat you? How is your supervisor? Is your supervisor clearly not going to be happy or management is not going to be happy? And so it creates a very complicated position for the individual if they’re still within the company or even for society. Like, is my next employer going to Google my name and somehow find the lawsuit? Am I going to be known as the person who sues? And so, you know, I think, and with some type of matters, like Equal Pay Act, I think it’s one thing to sue, but when your lawsuit involves intimate details, they’re very private in nature, some people just might not want that information out, even if they can sue under a Jane Doe or a John Doe. It’s very sensitive information and they might think it can be pieced together and, you know, connected to them. So I think, based on what I’ve observed, and I have had people after I’ve gone through the process with them be like, okay, I can’t do this, you know, and there are situations where, you know, I’ve negotiated severances and the individual was given like a ridiculously low severance and I was like, you have a solid case. You know, I can’t guarantee a victory, but you have a very solid case. And they’re like, I can’t do this. I just can’t. And so I think it really, it comes down to having societal support for vindicating one’s rights. It comes down to having, you know, being in that company potentially still. It comes down to lack of information, not knowing what it entails. But also, you know, it comes down to their, in an individual’s capacity. Because if you are, let’s say, a caretaker for a parent, you have, you know, several kids you’re going through school and you have all these things and then you’re trying to work to make ends meet and something happens to you at work, are you going to have the capacity and the bandwidth to find a lawyer to consider suing when your life is already packed with all of these things? So yeah, I think there are a lot of different variables that keep people or in which people choose not to pursue that route. And I think some of those decisions are well made because, you know, they’ve probably thought it through. And some of those decisions are really just a lack of information, which is sad. And so that’s something I think we can all work on our end as plaintiff’s side attorneys.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

I also hear inside of that some systemic issues that could still stand to be addressed, you know, specifically like around mental health and the legal system providing more mental health support for folks who have had something happen that is traumatic. And then the legal issues, being re-traumatizing and finding more support for that. And I also hear that so much of this sounds like a lot of the reasons are things that probably disproportionately affect people with marginalized identities. And so I’m going to guess that they then become underrepresented in lawsuits. It sounds like a lot of the things that you represent and the kinds of infractions that happen in workplaces often affect people who have some marginalized identities and then they face some of the biggest barriers to suing. Am I reading that correctly?

 

Navruz Avloni:

You know, I don’t have statistics behind this. So I can’t really speak on who is impacted, you know, whether there’s one group that’s impacted more than another. But I do think that from my experience, my clients tend to be from marginalized groups, typically people of color, people with disabilities, women, especially women in primarily male-dominated professions.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

When I think about Me Too and everything that came to light out of that, which already many of us had experienced these kinds of things in the workplace, so it wasn’t surprising, which is what powered Me Too, right? Because so many people saying, yes, I’ve been there. I’ve had that experience. And I think what it really shined the light on is power differential, power dynamics in the workspace. And we know where the power lies in the system in which we live right now. I mean, we live in, you know, racist patriarchy. It’s white men that have the most benefit and who tend to have the most advantage as far as being the employer versus the employee. So just by those numbers, it would make sense then that the offender and the offended are probably going to fall in line with those sorts of things. And so I just wonder, the power differential or the power dynamics that are at play in these sorts of scenarios. You’ve been practicing law before and since the Me Too movement. Have you noticed a change in people’s willingness to speak up even when there is that power differential?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think right after the Me Too movement, there was definitely a huge burst of like, I feel comfortable enough speaking up, right? And I think that lasted for some time. But today, I don’t know. I don’t know if there are more women feeling more comfortable speaking up than pre Me Too movement, because there are these considerations, right? It’s career. Am I going to jeopardize my career? And you see some of the bigger cases where women do take on big companies. And I’m talking about like C-level executive women who bring on matters because of sex discrimination, not having a voice at the table, not getting equal pay. And then what happens? Often they become consultants because they can’t land another C-level executive position at another company. And I’m not saying, I don’t know this, but I speculate, which is why they go into consulting sometimes. And so it’s really, it’s sad. So I think, yeah, I think it really impacts progress in some ways. But yeah, the power differential is usually at play when it comes, depending on the type of cases, but when it comes to sexual harassment there’s almost always some sort of a power differential at play. Yeah, I think depending on the type of a case, if it’s a sexual harassment, sexual assault case, power differential is very frequently at play. I think with other cases, let’s say, age discrimination, disability, not always. It’s usually HR or decision makers not being educated enough on what the requirements are.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

That’s perfect because what I wanted to ask you about next was before on the last time we talked, you had mentioned that there were two big kind of reasons why employers end up being sued for a lot of these things that you work around. And they are bad apples and then bad policies. And I’m wondering which is more common in your experience. Is it more often that it’s just bad policies at play or is it there’s just these random bad apples that are causing problems?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think it depends on the type of case. I think with sexual harassment, race harassment, sex discrimination, race discrimination is typically bad apples at play. And I think companies can really, really help address that by vetting people much more carefully who are in the higher ranks. Because in those situations, you really have people with power and authority abusing their power when it comes to sex or race harassment. With respect to policies, I think those issues tend to come up more in, let’s say, disability cases. Some smaller companies or medium-sized companies that may not have the resources to have a full-time HR person or legal counsel on their side, often assume that it’s okay to fire someone as soon as their FML expires. You know, so let’s say someone is on leave because they’re going through chemo or because their parents are in a hospice and so they’ve taken time to go on leave. And some of these companies assume that because they’ve expired, their three months leave expired and they’re still not back, they can be fired. But the law says otherwise. The law says that you have to accommodate potentially additional leave as long as it’s not an undue burden on the company. And so I feel like in that case, you know, some companies that are smaller typically, although I’ve had some bigger companies also make this mistake, tend to miss this mark and sometimes don’t even include anything in their policies on this issue, which I see actually come up quite frequently. 

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

The bad policies, let’s get to in a second. And I know we’re gonna record separately. So if you’re not a subscriber yet to Feminist Founders newsletter, go subscribe because we’re gonna record some tips on how to avoid getting yourself into one of these lawsuits. But first let’s talk about bad apples. It may not be as common, but a bad apple can really ruin things for your company, I would imagine. It can cost you a lot of money and reputation. And I know you’re a lawyer and not an HR professional. But I’m just curious through your experience with that, are there things that you’ve noticed that might be red flags or ways for employers to manage not having bad apples or how to deal with bad apples so that you don’t end up having your company jeopardized because of a bad apple?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think the law kind of provides some protection to employers when it comes to lower rank-and-file employees. So if someone is not a supervisor or someone is not a management-level employee, typically if they engage in bad behavior, the company is not on the hook, usually, unless the company has had notice of the individual engaging in similar behavior, unless that person has some sort of supervisory power or an individual who they’ve done this to. So you can’t always avoid bad apples. I think the law is kind of familiar, is aware of that. So in some cases you will have lower-level employees engaging in some misconduct and in that situation, an employer, depending on the misconduct, can decide what’s an appropriate response to it. Now it becomes much more, the liability opens up is when you have a supervisor engaging in conduct that’s illegal because then the company, um, is on the hook for the conduct of a supervisor. Or worse yet, when you have someone at management level or someone who is on the executive level, engaging this behavior, because then the company might not only be on the hook for their wrongful conduct, but also might be exposed to punitive damages. And so I think in terms of how to avoid bad apples, I think you, you look for things early on and you screen a lot. I think employees, depending on the level they’re in, should be screened extensively the higher they are. And often during interviews, you know, we focus so much on accomplishments on, you know, on what a person can do for the company. But I think there’s, you know, a very important component about what kind of an individual is that person? What kind of a reputation do they have? What kind of culture have they built and their reputation and the culture they’ve built at their prior company, let’s say, could say a lot about that specific individual. And so I think that’s probably one way to try to screen for bad apples. But another way is really to ensure that your workforce feels like they can speak, that they trust the company. And so I think culture again is really at the heart of it is having employees at regardless of what level feel like they can trust and be safe in speaking out. Because then you can catch the bad apples really early on. Because an employee where something might not have been so egregious might immediately speak up about that conduct. And then once another employee might speak up and then you’d be like, hey, there’s a problem here. Versus in companies where there’s no culture of trust or transparency, it’s much more difficult to spot those bad apples because no one or few people are might be willing to speak up.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Bad policies or lack of policies is maybe more common, especially with the kinds of folks who are probably listening to this because I think most of us are gonna make sure that we’re doing a pretty good job of hiring values-aligned folks. When it comes to policies and businesses that don’t have a team of lawyers, that don’t have a big HR department, what’s your advice? Actually, maybe you can start with giving us just some examples. You mentioned FML. Are there other examples that kind of point to the kinds of things that maybe those folks wouldn’t realize are potential issues that could put them on the hook?

 

Navruz Avloni:

Policies are important to some extent. I think no matter how small you are, if you are planning to hire and if you are planning to have individuals working for you, I think it’s important to know what the law requires of that relationship and what the law requires that you do. And so you know, there are firms that work specifically with smaller companies and that provides a training and overview, um, specifically about, you know, and so I think, first of all, I would recommend doing research, you know, you might be a small company and you might think that getting policies in place might, might be too expensive because you’re small, but not having done the research or seen what the cost of that would be, I think, um, you know, might lead to conclusions that might not necessarily be true. So I would just first explore and figure out what your options are, especially if you’re hiring and growing, I think it’s important from the outset to know what your responsibilities are. And the problems don’t always arise from policies. It also arises from not following policies or ignoring them because some companies have policies and they’re great they look perfect on paper, but nobody really follows them. In terms of laws in general, I think I would need probably a full day with you, Becky, to go through, depending on whether we’re talking about federal laws or California laws, we have here FIHA, which prohibits discrimination, harassment, retaliation based on a protected class. We have the labor code, wage and hour. So I think the topic is very broad and I can go at length about it. But in general, I think I don’t do wage and hour law. I specialize in harassment, discrimination, retaliation, whistleblower claims. I think tip wise, I think I do see a lot still, a lot of cases come in or intakes come in where people don’t understand the difference between FMLA leave and accommodation requirements. The leave is a form of accommodation. And so I think that’s like an easy one that people should definitely pay attention to. But also, you know, I think when you are, I don’t want to say, when you are, when you really care about your employees and they’re going through something you know, and the three months is up and yes, it might not be easy to give them additional time. But I think even if you don’t know the law, if you come from an empathetic approach and ask like how much additional time do you need? And if they tell you, you know, a timeframe that you know is going to impact your business significantly, you know, communicating and saying back, well, here’s what, you know, here’s the impact on us if we do this, but I think we can do this, you know, it’s working to find a solution. And so, you know, in some cases that happens where people don’t even know what the law is. And I think the law is supposed to kind of mirror, like, just the civility that employers and employees should have amongst each other. In terms of another thing sometimes I see is age. If you happen to hire somebody and they’re getting older and for some reason you think that they should retire, don’t tell them that. You know, telling someone you should retire it’s time for you to retire, you know because you’re excited to hire someone different, and then you know forcing them into retirement also I feel like some people don’t view that necessarily as being potentially illegal because they might come from a place of like, you know they might claim they’re coming from a place of empathy, but you can’t make decisions for somebody else, you know. And if you’re if your pressure is motivated by their age, then that could be a potential violation too. So there are various different areas. And the thing is, I think with HR training, one of the things HR personnel can do really more is train on the gray areas. When we get those policies and handbooks and they include obviously crazy behavior where people are like, I’m not gonna do this. I’m gonna, why am I even here? This is totally not for me. But I think the most effective trainings for owners, managers, employees, supervisors, are really where people get into the gray area where it’s not clear and where it’s like, whoa, I might have done this. Did that offend somebody? Or I might do this, is this okay? Because it starts a discussion and it gets people’s attention. It gets people to focus. And so I think that we can see more of, it’d be good to see more of because the trainings I’ve seen, because on my end I do discovery and we get the trainings from the companies typically, are really the black-and-white examples. But there are some HR companies that do focus on that gray area, which I think is more effective for training.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

And for those founders who are still smaller, you mentioned California Civil Rights Department having trainings available. I’m assuming most states’ Civil Rights departments probably also do where you can go and get things for more than likely free or low cost to help you start to learn some of those gray areas and be clear about that. I’m assuming there’s also lawyers who represent folks before they ever even have any kind of lawsuit, but to say, let’s look at your policies and make sure that you’re following the laws here. I’m assuming as a plaintiff, that’s probably not the kind of law that you’re doing, but there are, I would assume, corporate-side law firms that would do that kind of work, right?

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think there are specific firms set up that are not necessarily corporate. They can be boutique. They can be an individual providing such services to companies. I have advised several companies that have reached out to me because I’m connected as a friend, as a family on setting up policies and have done some trainings, but I don’t litigate on behalf of a company, I litigate specifically on behalf of the individual. But, you know, when you do, when I have had family or friends, I have numerous friends who happen to be business owners. I have absolutely, I’m there to provide them with guidance so they don’t mess up. You know, I want to make sure that they are fine and nothing is better than avoiding a problem from the start.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

That sounds like a lawyer and that is exactly great advice, right? Nothing better than avoiding it before it ever becomes a problem. And I, again, the people who are listening to this, it’s not about, I know that it’s not like, ooh, how can I skirt the law? Right? These are folks who want to run people-first businesses. They want to treat people with respect. They want to follow the laws, but there’s a lot in running a business that you just don’t know and you can’t know. And it’s important to learn so that you do things the right way, not just in a way that feels good, but also is actually making sure that you are doing everything you’re supposed to legally. So thank you for sharing all of that. Was there anything that we didn’t talk about that you wanted to make sure we talk about knowing the audience that we’re speaking to?

 

Navruz Avloni:

From my perspective as a business owner now myself too, I think we’re gonna make mistakes all the time. I make mistakes all the time. I made a silly mistake the other time because I happened to have one contractor that I switched to an employee status after she worked with me for a month or two. And she was based in New York. And I didn’t get timely New York workers’ compensation insurance. I was like, oh my God, how did I space out on this? I’m in California. And you know what? I paid the fee, the penalty, it was no big deal. We will make, I think as business owners, small mistakes in our journey. And we’ll get better, we’ll get smarter, we’ll get more successful learning from those mistakes. I think the key is really to figure out a way to avoid those big mistakes that are gonna cost and that are gonna impact business. And in some cases might, prevent a business from flourishing or moving forward. And I think, legally speaking, if someone is growing, they really should look for some sort of sound legal advice on suggestions on what they can do in terms of to make sure they are protected.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

My guess is that most people aren’t out there trying to catch you so they can sue you, at least not for the kinds of things that you are representing people around. As you talked about, these are hard, difficult decisions for people to make to even bring this kind of lawsuit forward. Most people, it sounds like really kind of agonize over it and don’t even want to have to bring these kinds of lawsuits forward. So it’s not like anyone’s out there trying to trick you into it. It’s about, like you said, can you just show that you’re trying and that you’re making an effort to do the right thing and you’re trying to learn? And that goes a long way, I would guess, to protect you.

 

Navruz Avloni:

Yes, very long way. And when I screen potential clients, I ask them, give me your chat history, give me your text history. And when I see on the other side, they really are trying to accommodate or are really trying to be good, there’s no way I’m gonna take that case. Trying to do the right thing goes a long way. 

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

I think you said that you typically don’t represent against really small employers for that reason because you’re not in the business here of trying to put a business out of business if they’re trying to do the right thing, or if they are working where they just don’t even have the resources.

 

Navruz Avloni:

Both of my parents were business owners and I saw the struggle of running a business from a very young age and it’s not easy. And I think the culpability in doing something wrong with a small business is very different from a big business that’s established and has, for which it would not be a significant cost to actually invest in ensuring their employees are treated right, versus it could be very different for a small business. So yeah, as a practice, I don’t typically, unless there’s some crazy, insane example, like I would not go for a small business or even a mid-sized business in most cases. There are some exceptions where there have been incredibly insane, inappropriate things done and an abuse of power, which are exceptions, but in general, yeah.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

And I think you said you grew up in Uzbekistan, is that right?

 

Navruz Avloni:

Yes, I was born in Uzbekistan and I moved here when I was nine.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

And your parents were entrepreneurs here.

 

Navruz Avloni:

Yes, actually. So my dad, he was a postdoc at UPenn, which is how we moved here. And then he spent quite a few years at the university at UPenn. And then he actually moved to California, where he ran a company for, I think, over 20 years. And my mom, she was a musician. She was a professor in a conservatory in Uzbekistan. And then when we moved here, she started off with her students at home and then at some point she expanded to five different schools, and grew her business that way. So I think the entrepreneurial side gene has always been somehow in our family, which you know, yeah, I have to say I’ve always looked up to my parents based on what they’ve been able to accomplish coming here. I think they were in their mid or late 30s and to put so much and take big risks to fulfill their dreams.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Does that experience for you, having been, you know, having parents who came here, for you being a first-generation American, does that affect the way you think about the law here or around like how you run your business?

 

Navruz Avloni:

Being first generation American, I think just makes me understand how much human life is valued in America compared to in some other areas in the world. I think it’s very, I don’t know of any single eight-, nine-figure verdicts in other countries for a loss of life of a family member or someone who might not even have had a degree versus we have that here. And so I think that’s one of the things I’m very well aware of is the value of human life here in the States. In terms of my parents, being entrepreneurs and coming from a different country, I think they’ve really instilled hard work in me. If you want something, just get it, work really hard. I think that that’s key and it’s very difficult to instill. Having my two daughters, your environment does really shape you. Your experiences shape you very much. But I do think my parents made me more conservative because as a kid growing up and watching them take risks, you know, I think I, for most of my life, I’ve played it very safe and conservatively because I’ve seen them take risks. I see, I’ve seen my mom, you know, take everything she had and invest into the school and then stress financially for a year on how she’s going to make ends meet, you know. I’ve seen my dad take risks in his company where he’s like, I don’t know how this is going to play out with the board. And so, yeah, I think that made me actually more conservative. But now here I am.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

You did it. Well, and I’m curious too, because I’m wondering, did your family relocate after the fall of the USSR?

 

Navruz Avloni:

Yeah, right after. My dad, he actually finished his PhD and then he had a few offers between Saudi Arabia, France and U.S., and so my mom was like, we’re not doing Saudi Arabia. My dad’s like, okay, France might not have a chance to grow as much as in U.S. So he took the U.S. route and we moved in 1992. And I think the fall of the Soviet Union was like two, three years prior. 

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

It was either ‘90 or ‘91. I was there actually, the two weeks before that coup happened. And when I was in high school doing an exchange program and I went to Tashkent, which isn’t in Uzbekistan? 

 

Navruz Avloni:

Yes, Capitol, that’s where I grew up.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

The point of me asking about your timing of coming was I wonder, just to sort of end this, we’re in a tough time in America, as I’m sure you know. And the legal system is very much in play with everything that’s going on politically as a pawn in all of that and what’s happened, the narrative around that, what that’s doing to people’s faith in the legal system. For many of us, the fears around what the legal system could look like in 2025 and beyond, depending on what happens in this next election. And I just wonder, as somebody who came from an entirely different system and has been here since you were nine, you obviously fell in love with the law, what is the current state of the world, of the US, and the way the legal system’s a part of that? What are your thoughts on that?

 

Navruz Avloni:

Wow. I don’t know where to start and I don’t know if I’m well enough prepared to answer that question.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

It’s a big one. I just wondered if there is some part of you that went into law, if you had a vision of what American democracy and how the legal system supports democracy, if that was part of that appeal for you, especially as somebody whose parents had left a situation that was different, and if what’s happening now brings up any sort of fears, or if maybe it doesn’t because you’re like, you know, my family has a very different experience and we’re not as worried, I don’t know.

 

Navruz Avloni:

I have to say this is such a big question because I’m like, what are you referring to Becky when you say what’s happening to us now? Because I’m like, there’s so much happening right now. Are we talking about what’s going on in the international world? Are we talking about what’s happening with women’s rights? Are we talking about politics?

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Well, I’m talking about all of that, but I’m talking about the American, I’m talking about politics, but how American politics is now sort of using the legal industry, the legal profession as a tool. We have, not to get like to find a point on it, but this is going to be airing during the political season, right? During the lead up to the next presidential election. We won’t know when this airs who will win but more than likely we know Trump’s gonna be the Republican nominee. And we know that he has pretty clearly said that he plans to use the Department of Justice for his bidding. And that is, has some potential scary ramifications. What’s happened with the Supreme court and the way it’s been stacked and, and politicized has already had, and continues to have, very scary ramifications and there’s this potential for the legal system, the way we know it to be wildly warped to support a maybe not-so-democratic vision for the future. I mean, that is what I think a lot of us fear we’re up against in this next election cycle. And I just am curious as somebody who’s inside the legal system and who has this added depth of understanding of having parents who’ve come from a communist, what was at that time a communist, nation and how different the legal system is there. Just curious that that, like if there’s anything inside of you that’s more concerned about protecting the legal system or that has more faith perhaps that the legal system will help support us through this scary time politically?

 

Navruz Avloni:

You know, if you asked me this question when I was an undergrad or in high school, you know, passionate about the law, becoming a lawyer one day, you know, I would have probably told you, politics? There’s no politics in the legal system. You know, there shouldn’t be any politics in the legal system. There is no politics. Not in America. But the reality is, since I guess starting with law school politics does play a big role in the legal system. Justices, depending on who nominated them into their role, has played, we can see how they’re likely to rule. And so I think politics has always been a part of the legal system in some way, but it shouldn’t. I don’t think it should. I think ideally, we need to have independent branches to ensure this country runs well, and that there’s no abuse of power. That’s the ideal. Can we have that ideal? I don’t know.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

I hope that by 2025, we’re all breathing a sigh of relief and we can, but thank you for humoring me in that very big question. Thank you for your time today. We’re gonna pause this and we’re gonna then record three tips for avoiding your getting into hot water legally. So make sure you subscribe to the Feminist Founders newsletter so that you can get that. Before we go though, I’m gonna have you share a resource that’s been helpful for you. 

 

Navruz Avloni:

It’s probably only appropriate for me to mention a woman author. I haven’t read her book, but I did see her, um, speak at the female founders collective. It was Liz Elting. And I have to say, I’m very curious to read her book, “Dream Big and Win: Translating passion into purpose and creating a billion-dollar business.” I think it’s very inspiring when women, especially, you know, this wasn’t that recent that she built an empire, are able to build empires. And you know, during the particular webinar that I watched her on, I think she really hit it well on some of the important things to watch out for as you grow, including, you know, culture, hiring decisions, and whatnot. So I’m looking forward to reading her book. And so while I haven’t read it, that’s something that I’m looking forward to and would probably recommend based on hearing her speak.

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

Tell me about a nonprofit that you support.

 

Navruz Avloni:

I think Empower Work is an amazing nonprofit and a great resource actually for smaller businesses too. Essentially, Empower Work has a ton of counselors who are available and employees who are having workplace issues and they can vary, right? For example, why didn’t I get that promotion? Or how do I deal with a bad write-up? Or my boss is making me feel uncomfortable. They can text these counselors. And they kind of help them, I guess, the employees, reach a decision, or find some sort of closure, or figure out, or provide them with some sort of resources. It’s not a legal company. They don’t provide legal advice, but they do provide counseling. And I think there’s such an important organization because we have employees and companies, and then we have lawyers. But there is so much gray area in between where in some cases, employees just want guidance. They just want a friend. They just want to be able to talk to somebody. And I think having that as a resource is invaluable because it can avoid potentially, who knows, litigation or having things escalate to a point where a lawyer is even needed

 

Becky Mollenkamp:

I think that’s great. I hadn’t heard of them so I’m gonna look them up. I’m gonna make a donation to say thank you for your time and encourage everyone listening to do the same. Thank you so much for your time. We’re gonna go record our three tips so subscribe to the newsletter, link is in the show notes, and I really appreciate your time today, Navruz.

 

Navruz Avloni:

Thank you, Becky. Thank you so much.