What is a “Disability” under California Law

Under California law, a “disability” is broadly construed. In the employment law context, an individual qualifies as having a “disability” under California law if the individual: 1. Has a physical disability, mental disability, special education disability, or medical condition that limits one of the major life activities of the individual; and 2. Has a record or […]

Read more...

What is a Reasonable Accommodation under California Law?

Under California law an employer must make reasonable accommodations for the known disability of an employee or applicant. Cal. Gov’t Code §12940(m); Dep’t of Fair Emp. & Hous. v. Lucent Technologies, Inc., 642 F.3d 728, 743 (9th Cir. 2011). A reasonable accommodation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) is “a modification or adjustment […]

Read more...

Employers Can Deny Disability Accommodations if They Can Prove Undue Hardship

In California, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations for applicants or employees with physical or mental disabilities.[1] However, an employer does not have to provide accommodations if those accommodations create an “undue hardship” for the employer.[2] California law defines undue hardship as an “action requiring significant difficulty or expense.”[3] When deciding whether a potential accommodation […]

Read more...

The EEOC’s Guidelines on an Employer’s Duty to Provide Reasonable Accommodation

Under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), individuals with disabilities are entitled to changes in the work environment, also known as “reasonable accommodations,” that allow them to enjoy the same opportunities in the workplace as individuals without disabilities.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has issued enforcement guidance on reasonable accommodations under […]

Read more...

Disabled Prison Guard Wins his Third Appeal Against the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

 

Courts can award attorneys’ fees to the prevailing plaintiff in a discrimination or harassment claim brought under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).  These attorney fee awards are designed to incentivize and reward a plaintiff’s counsel for litigating a civil rights case that is generally taken on a contingency fee basis and therefore has inherent risks.  Trial courts first calculate the lodestar amount, which is the product of the hours spent and the prevailing hourly rate of attorneys in the community conducting similar non-contingent litigation.  Then courts can increase this amount by adding a multiplier or increasing the lodestar amount by looking at various factors, such as the risk of non-payment, the public interest in advancing civil rights cases, the complexity of the issues involved, and the skill of the attorneys.  Continue reading “Disabled Prison Guard Wins his Third Appeal Against the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation”

Read more...

Proving Discrimination and Harassment Cases in California

In a victory for workers’ rights, the California Legislature enacted California Government Code section 12923 as a statement of legislative findings and purpose regarding harassment and discrimination claims brought under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). The legislation was enacted to “provide all Californians with an equal opportunity to succeed in the workplace.” The Legislature […]

Read more...

Court of Appeal Rules in Favor of Gay CHP Veteran Suing for Sexual Orientation Discrimination

An openly gay California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer, Jay Brome, brought suit against his employer after enduring twenty years of harassment and discrimination.  The trial court dismissed his claims on the grounds that they were not filed within the statute of limitations.  The California Court of Appeal for the First District reversed the trial court’s ruling in a unanimous opinion, holding that equitable tolling could extend Mr. Brome’s statute of limitations.  (Brome v. California Highway Patrol, A154612, filed January 28, 2020.) Continue reading “Court of Appeal Rules in Favor of Gay CHP Veteran Suing for Sexual Orientation Discrimination”

Read more...

Disabled Psychologist’s Claims for Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation against Department of Corrections Fail Despite Providing Doctor’s Notes

Gear and GavelAs an employee, there may be times when you need an accommodation in the workplace due to a disability.  Sometimes, your employer may ask for a doctor’s note in the course of engaging in the interactive process.  How specific do the doctor’s notes need to be?  A recently published case provides some insight into this question.

Plaintiff John Doe began working at Ironwood State Prison as a psychologist in 2012.  In 2013, he requested to work in a quiet place that allowed him to focus and concentrate.  Continue reading “Disabled Psychologist’s Claims for Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation against Department of Corrections Fail Despite Providing Doctor’s Notes”

Read more...

Intolerable Working Conditions Support a Nurse’s Constructive Termination Claim

A 54-year old Filipino woman, Shirley Galvan, worked for Dameron Hospital Association (Dameron) as a nurse for approximately twenty-five years.  In 2011, Doreen Alvarez became Ms. Galvan’s supervisor and allegedly began harassing Ms. Galvan and other Filipino employees.  Ms. Alvarez commented that the Filipino employees could not speak English, had thick accents, made too much money, were too old, and had been at Dameron too long.  Ms. Alvarez threatened to “clean house” and repeatedly humiliated the Filipino employees by making derogatory statements about their accents, level of education, and work performance.  Ms. Galvan went out on stress leave due to the anxiety she was experiencing as a result of this harassment.  She was constructively terminated in 2014.

Ms. Galvan brought suit against Dameron and Ms. Alvarez, alleging that she had been discriminated against and harassed on the basis of her age and national origin, and constructively terminated in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Continue reading “Intolerable Working Conditions Support a Nurse’s Constructive Termination Claim”

Read more...

California Court of Appeal Addresses Meaning of “Physically Disabled”

The California Court of Appeal recently issued an opinion that looked into whether an employee has a disability for purposes of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Ross v. County of Riverside, D075106 (published June 10, 2019).  Plaintiff Christopher Ross worked for the County of Riverside as a deputy district attorney.  In 2013, Mr. Ross discovered that he might have a serious neurological condition.  Continue reading “California Court of Appeal Addresses Meaning of “Physically Disabled””

Read more...