In addition to misclassification of employment status and workers' comp issues, there are at least a couple other claims that should be considered under these facts, including breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The California Employment Lawyers Association maintains a comprehensive directory of employee-side lawyers throughout the state. You can visit CELA's website at www.cela.org, click on the "Member Search" link and find employment attorneys in the area.
The answer to your question depends on your commission agreement. Generally, however, even a commission agreement cannot be used to circumvent minimum wage laws for an in-house employee. You should set up a consultation to have an attorney take a look at your commission agreement.
If this was a personal email account and journal and these were somehow hacked, invasion of privacy is one area your matter might involve. Privacy claims hinge on one's reasonable expectation of privacy, and these are very fact-intensive claims (what was the material? where was it stored? how was it accessed and by whom? who is now spreading the information and how?). Without knowing more about the incidents of harassment, it's difficult to assess potential claims in that area, but it sounds...
Yes, a number of employment attorneys (including myself) take cases on contingency. There's also a comprehensive directory of employment attorneys at the California Employment Lawyers Association website: www.cela.org
It's difficult to answer this without knowing what the "bad-mouthing" involved. If it was along the lines of "My boss sucks because he doesn't pay the overtime I'm entitled to," or "I can't believe this jerk at work is sexually harassing me," that's one thing and retaliation for making complaints like that could be unlawful. If it was simply false and potentially defamatory statements as to the supervisor, that could potentially be a basis for discipline.
Good thing to keep in mind is that...
I agree with the above answers but would just add that the final step in the analysis would be to establish that the employer's "legitimate" reason is pretext. If their reason is performance, why did your direct supervisor give you a glowing review? If it was a true position elimination, why is another person filling your position less than a week later? As you can see, the employer might have some serious explaining to do.
In cases like this, the claims come down to whether or not your employer would have taken the same action against you regardless of the pregnancy. Were men who committed the same few "mistakes" terminated? Were non-pregnant women who committed the same few "mistakes" terminated? Aside from pregnancy discrimination laws, disability and gender discrimination statutes may apply here as well.
Non-exempt employees need to be paid for all hours worked and overtime for all hours in excess of 40 hours/week or 8 hours/day. If you were previously misclassified as exempt, you may also be entitled to recover prior wages due.
As to that hour a day that seems to be automatically deducted: generally, normal commutes from home to work and back are non-compensable. However, there are situations in which commutes should be compensated where the workday begins at home, continues at various job...