In 1984, the Legislature enacted California Labor Code section 1102.5 in order to protect whistleblowers from retaliation against their employers. The law was amended in 2003 and again in 2013, to add protections afforded to employees. In 2013, specifically, the Legislature amended section 1102.5(b), so that an employee’s disclosure “to a person with authority over the employee or another employee who has the authority to investigate, discover, or correct the violation or non-compliance” was deemed protected activity. On May 22, 2023, the California Supreme Court addressed whether reporting a violation that is already known to an employer or agency constitutes a protected disclosure under Labor Code section 1102.5(b) in People ex. Rel. Lilia Garcia-Brower v. Kolla’s, Inc., S269456. Continue reading “California Supreme Court Rules that Whistleblower Protections Apply to Employees Who Disclose Illegal Conduct Already Known to an Employer”
Author: Tanya Tambling
An Employer’s Duty to Provide a Reasonable Accommodation
Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), an employee must generally provide an employer notice of the need for a reasonable accommodation for his or her disability. Achal v. Gate Gourmet, Inc., N.D. Cal. 2015, 114 F.Supp.3d 781. There is no one set way to request an accommodation, but an employer is not required to provide a reasonable accommodation until it is aware of the employee or applicant’s disability and physical limitations. Continue reading “An Employer’s Duty to Provide a Reasonable Accommodation”
An Employer’s Duty to Provide a Reasonable Accommodation
Under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), an employer must make a reasonable accommodation for the known disability of an employee. Cal. Gov. Code §12940(m); Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Lucent Technologies, Inc. (9th Cir. 2011) 642 F.3d 728, 743. Failure to reasonably accommodate a disabled employee or applicant is a violation of the FEHA in and of itself. Brown v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2021) 60 Cal. App. 5th 1092, 1107; Furtado v. State Personnel Bd. (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 729, 745. Continue reading “An Employer’s Duty to Provide a Reasonable Accommodation”
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”
Expanded Rights for Employees during the COVID-19 Pandemic
The U.S. Department of Labor posted a temporary rule on April 1, 2020 that provides most employees impacted by the coronavirus with some much-needed benefits under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA). These benefits include public emergency health leave under Title I of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and emergency paid sick […]
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”
Employer Not Liable for an Accident Caused by its Employee
Kim Rushton, an employee of the City of Los Angeles (City of LA), struck and killed a pedestrian, Ralph Bingener, while commuting to work. Mr. Rushton, a 68-year old man with neurological conditions, worked as a chemist in a water quality lab checking water for semi-volatile organic compounds. He did not use his car for his employment. All of Mr. Rushton’s work was performed at the lab and he rarely left the plant for work-related travel. Continue reading “Employer Not Liable for an Accident Caused by its Employee”
Disabled Psychologist’s Claims for Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation against Department of Corrections Fail Despite Providing Doctor’s Notes
As 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...San Francisco State University Professor Prevails on Retaliation Claim
San Francisco State University (SFSU) hired Rashmi Gupta in 2006 as a tenure track assistant professor in the School of Social Work. Generally, tenure track professors work for a six year term. After that, SFSU decides whether or not to promote a tenure track professor to the position of associate professor and award lifetime tenure.
Dr. Gupta initially faced some hurdles when she began teaching at SFSU. Her student evaluations were lower than average; however, Dr. Gupta was praised for her efforts in research, scholarship and publication. By 2009, Dr. Gupta had overcome her initial challenges and was receiving positive reviews from students and peer evaluators.
In 2009, Dr. Gupta and several other women of color in the School of Social Work lodged a complaint with the provost to express their concerns about the abuse of power, bullying, micromanagement and a hostile work environment at SFSU. At a follow up meeting, the women expressed concern about the Director of the School of Social Work, and more generally, about discrimination against people of color on campus.
Less than two months after Dr. Gupta lodged her complaints, she received a negative performance review. Many of the criticisms in the review were inaccurate. Dr. Gupta then emailed a colleague complaining that SFSU was hostile toward women of color, and named two individuals for creating the hostile work environment, Don Taylor and Rita Takahashi. At a meeting in March 2010, Dr. Taylor told Dr. Gupta that he knew about the emails, and threatened “to get even with [her].” Continue reading “San Francisco State University Professor Prevails on Retaliation Claim”
Read more...