NEW EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYER HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION PREVENTION POLICIES Effective April 1, 2016, employers must comply with a new California law relating to employer harassment, discrimination and retaliation prevention policies. The new regulation mandates specific procedures for compliance with an employer’s statutory duty to take reasonable steps to prevent and promptly correct… Read More »
Erica Sorosky, a Partner in the Business Litigation Group, outlines just some of the more relevant new and amended legislation for 2016: SB 358: Equal Pay Act Employers are prohibited from paying employees at wage rates less than those paid to employees of the opposite sex for “substantially similar work,” which is now to be… Read More »
Continuing Violation Doctrine In Jumaane v. City of Los Angeles, plaintiff sued the City of Los Angeles for alleged disparate impact and disparate treatment discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on his race. Plaintiff alleged that adverse employment actions were taken against him in June 1999 and April 2011 when he was suspended from work. Plaintiff… Read More »
Arbitration of Employment Claims. The California legislature recently passed AB 465, which is a bill that prohibits employers from requiring employees to agree to arbitrate employment claims as a condition of their employment. Other provisions of AB 465 include: 1) requiring employers to prove that arbitration was entered into voluntarily; 2) prohibiting employers from threatening,… Read More »
Reasonable Accommodation Constitutes Protected Activity. In July 2015, Governor Brown signed AB 987, which provides that a request for reasonable accommodation on the basis of religion or disability constitutes protected activity under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), regardless of whether the request for accommodation was granted. This new law reverses the California Court… Read More »
Protected Speech at Work In Turner v. City and County of San Francisco, the plaintiff, Turner, sued his employer, the City and County of San Francisco (the “City”) for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Plaintiff alleged that he had been wrongfully retaliated against because he had complained that the City improperly employed him… Read More »