Sexual Harassment Archives - California Labor & Employment Law

Huge California Sexual Harassment Verdict

March 19, 2020 by Beck Law P.C.

2019 was not a good year for Alki David, owner of Alki David Productions and FilmOn. The year wrapped up with David being plastered with a nearly $9 million workplace sexual harassment verdict. The jury punctuated their sexual harassment verdict with an award for damages totaling an additional $50 million.

The Gist of the Case

Mahim Khan claimed she was subjected to David’s groping, moaning, dropping his pants, and other examples of sexual harassment. The jury found that the behaviors, which occurred repeatedly over an extended period of time, were perpetrated with malice. That led to the punitive damages, and a finding that David’s companies fostered a hostile work environment. David’s own attorney described him as “…loud, arrogant, and obnoxious.”

David’s History of Sexual Harassment Shows He Does Not Learn

Khan was not the first to take David to court for his improper behaviors in the workplace:

Lauren Reeves was awarded over $5 million in damages following a sexual harassment case against him;
Chastity Jones was awarded roughly $11 million in her case against David.

How to Respond if You Experience Sexual Harassment at Work

Sexual harassment occurs every day in this country and across the globe. As a sexual harassment victim, you have the law behind you in these situations. Your best bet is to hire a reputable sexual harassment attorney right away. There are a number of steps you can take to ensure justice prevails. For starters:

Look at the guidance in your employee handbook, and follow any procedures outlined there;
Make a formal complaint to the human resources department in writing;
Keep detailed notes of what occurs, including who was present, what was said and done, and when and where incidents took place;
Speak to a direct supervisor about the issue and ask for protection from the abuser during the investigation process;
Seek support from friends, family, or co-workers if you feel comfortable doing so;
Consider filing a complaint with the EEOC if you believe discrimination is a factor in the harassment.

If Reporting Sexual Harassment Results in Retaliation

In the event an employer chooses to retaliate against you for coming forward, you still have the law on your side. Retaliation may be in the form of job reassignments, exclusion from training or other opportunities, or outright degradation and shaming. These and other reactions to sexual harassment are not legal, and they are not to be tolerated. [Read more…]

Filed Under: Blog, Sexual Harassment Tagged With: santa rosa sexual harassment attorney

New Law Related to California Sexual Harassment Training

October 14, 2019 by Beck Law P.C.

California sexual harassment training laws, deadline extended. If you work for a company that has not trained its employees on the laws regarding sexual harassment in the workplace, the likelihood of such harassment occurring is naturally higher. That is expressly why California sexual harassment training law requires employers to provide this important information to all employees. Recent changes to the law impact the expectations for this training. If you have concerns about sexual harassment, a local labor and employment attorney may be able to help.

Importance of Effective Training

Recent allegations of sexual harassment plague the headlines. The failure to provide effective training can lead to employee missteps in the form of improper “jokes,” or even outright threats, intimidations, and written, verbal, or physical assaults. Any of these can make the workplace feel unsafe for employees, and are examples of behaviors that are untenable under California law. While the perpetrator of such actions can be held liable for such actions, employers who fail to address them in a proper and timely fashion are also accountable by law.

New California Sexual Harassment Training Law Deadline

Prior legislation required employers with five or more employees to arrange for a sexual harassment training by 2020. SB 778, which was signed into law in August 2019, extends that deadline to 2021.

California Harassment Training Requirements

The requirements for California sexual harassment training remain the same — two hours of education on the issues for all supervisors within six months of gaining such a position, at least once every two years. The training must speak to issues of abusive conduct according to California law.

Seasonal Employees

Temporary or seasonal workers also must undergo training. This must occur within 30 days or 100 hours of work, whichever comes first, if the worker has been hired to a position that will last six months or less.

Resources

There is no excuse for employers who claim they do not know who to go to for California sexual harassment training materials. The Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) has been tasked with creating online materials that employers may use. These materials must have an interactive section, necessitating participant interactions wherein they answer questions periodically in order for the program to continue running. When employees have questions throughout the course, the human resources department of the employer is required to address them. [Read more…]

Filed Under: Blog, Sexual Harassment Tagged With: santa rosa sexual harassment attorney

Workplace Sexual Harassment Retaliation

June 25, 2018 by Beck Law P.C.

Workplace sexual harassment. When the vice-principal of one California middle school objected to her principal’s nickname for her (Double D), as well as his comments about the physique and desirability of colleagues, it did not go well for her. If you can relate to institutional sexism in your place of work, you may benefit from the advice of a local employment attorney.

A History of Workplace Sexual Harassment Problems

Principal Pinto had a reputation as a misogynist who overtly disrespected female teachers and staff on a regular basis. The evidence of this lies in the 15 workplace sexual harassment grievances filed against him within one school year. Included in the complaints were these abhorrent incidents:

He casually talked about female employees’ breasts;
He stated that when one employee was making fish, the odor must have been coming from his vice-principal’s genitals.

Nonetheless, after the complaints were documented with the district, no protections were offered to the complainants. Instead, they faced additional hostility. When Pinto’s vice-principal either excused herself from meetings or broke into tears in reaction to his insults, Pinto’s response was to tell her that she had a choice – either “deal with it or resign.” She chose to deal with it.

The Workplace Sexual Harassment Lawsuit

Ultimately, a lawsuit was filed citing the following complaints:

Sexual harassment;
Hostile work environment;
Retaliation.

Specifically, the suit alleges that Pinto held sexist opinions and that he believed women should acquiesce to the will of men. Only teachers and staff who were willing to embrace this subservient stance were able to avoid the wrath of Pinto. Others, who were particularly successful or assertive were targeted relentlessly. When Pinto became aware of the complaints against him by his vice-principal, he responded by assigning her less desirable duties and relieving her of responsibilities to lead professional development classes and to evaluate teachers. Another teacher who had experienced problems with the principal and complained also suffered retaliation. After preparing throughout the summer for a California Cadet Corps course, she found the class cancelled by Pinto on orientation day. Eventually, both women were forced to quit altogether.

Now, the district may be liable for punitive damages, compensatory damages, lost wages, lost benefits, emotional distress, and medical expenses associated with the experience.

Defining Workplace Sexual Harassment

Sexual harassment in the workplace is illegal. It may take the form of inappropriate verbal comments and jokes, leering or sexually suggestive gestures, pictures and cartoons, unwelcome physical contact, or the swapping of employment opportunities for sexual favors. When any of these behaviors are shunned or reported and the harasser becomes threatening or retaliates in any way, it is against the law. [Read more…]

Filed Under: Blog, Sexual Harassment Tagged With: hostile work environment, petaluma employment retaliation lawyer, santa rosa sexual harassment attorney

Office Party that Will Not Lead to Lawsuits

December 19, 2017 by Beck Law P.C.

After a year of hard work and decent profits, many companies celebrate in December with a holiday office party. Unfortunately, sometimes an office party can bring out the worst in employees and their bosses. If your office festivities take an ugly turn, what are possible consequences? A local employment attorney can answer this question.

Office Party – Questions Managers Should Consider

To minimize the possibility of ugly scenes, managers and party planners should consider some key questions:

Should alcohol be served? If so, will there be limits?
Will the company provide safe transportation home after the festivities?
How can you avoid discrimination issues with Christmas parties?
Can employee behavior at a company party result in termination? If so, on what grounds?
Can pictures of the party be posted on social media after the event?

Avoiding Legal Issues

Clearly, circumstances differ for every business. Experts suggest that alcohol-related problems can be avoided by holding a breakfast or lunch party. If you really want an evening event, consider these guidelines to avoid legal liability after your gathering:

Refer to the event as a Winter Celebration or even a Holiday Party, not a Christmas party.
Avoid “open bars.” Instead, opt for a cash bar or provide a limited number of tickets to be exchanged for drinks.
Advise professional bartenders to check I.D. and report individuals who seem to have over-imbibed.
Provide rides home, or hotel rooms, for inebriated partiers.
Serve plenty of food, especially if alcohol is on the premises.
Invite the employees’ spouses or significant others. It tends to keep people on their best behavior.
Advise everyone in writing that workplace conduct standards remain in place at the party. The upshot of inappropriate behavior or misconduct will be disciplinary action.
Have a written policy related to social media and privacy issues;
Avoid exchanges of gag-gifts or white elephant gifts. There is too great a possibility of sexual harassment issues.
Do not hang mistletoe. You are just asking for problems with it!
Remind managers to keep an eye on things and make sure questionable behaviors are nipped before they become problematic.

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Blog, Sexual Harassment Tagged With: office party, petaluma sexual harassment attorney

Employers: Prevent a Sexual Harassment Case

October 6, 2017 by Beck Law P.C.

As an employer, are you liable if one of your employees is accused of sexual harassment? Although every case is different, there are things you can do to provide an affirmative defense in the event a lawsuit comes your way. Beyond that, having an experienced employment law attorney on your side is a must.

Sexual Harassment Prevention Training

The first thing every employer needs to do is ensure that adequate and appropriate training is provided. In California, state law AB1825 mandates that employers with 50 or more employees provide training for supervisors. That training must occur every two years.

Who Must Experience Sexual Harassment Prevention Training?

Although everyone can benefit from training, supervisors must be trained. That means anyone who has the authority to reward or discipline other employees or deal with grievances, even if the official job title is not supervisor.

What Must Sexual Harassment Training Embody?

The training itself may be delivered on-line, if linked to a trainer who is available to answer employee questions within two days. Another option is to have information delivered by an instructor in a classroom, or in a large format like a seminar, if the trainer follows the regulations laid out by law and uses best instructional practices. There are specific requirements as to who may be a trainer:

Attorneys who practice employment law, or;
Professors with a post graduate degree or teaching credential with experience in employment law, or;
Human resource personnel with at least two years experience designing materials or delivering trainings, dealing with such complaints in a workplace, investigating such complaints, or advising employers or employees in such matters,

The training must encompass information about state and federal laws prohibiting sexual harassment, in addition to remedies for victims of such activity. There must also be practical case studies of sexual harassment, discrimination, and employee retaliation, and information about how to prevent each.

In the Event of a Sexual Harassment Lawsuit

What if an employee brings a sexual harassment lawsuit? Having complied with the training requirements does not necessarily abdicate the employer of responsibility, but it is a first, minimum step. Other steps employers should take:

Have a printed policy defining sexual harassment and company policy as to consequences for such behavior. Discuss it with new employees, and review it on occasion with all employees.
Provide training to workers, as well as supervisors.
Establish a clear grievance procedure and methods of dealing with complaints. Then keep the information confidential.
Investigate all complaints quickly and effectively, and document everything related to the complaints.
Protect the victim from the moment the complaint is filed, and correct the issue expeditiously. Then ensure that no form of retaliation ensues.

Collecting Attorney Fees in EEOC Discrimination Case

August 18, 2016 by Beck Law P.C.

New Supreme Court ruling is a boon to employers hoping to collect attorney’s fees in an EEOC discrimination case. If your company is dealing with an EEOC complaint, you will most likely find the Supreme Court’s recent decision in CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to be welcome news. The case involved a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which held that a defendant in a Title VII case (such as an employer) is only entitled to payment for its attorney’s fees if it prevails in court after a “ruling on the merits.” The Supreme Court overturned this decision, and held that it is possible for a defendant to prevail and receive compensation for attorney’s fees, even without a ruling on the merits.

EEOC Discrimination Case Background

CRST’s EEOC discrimination case legal battle (which has lasted for over a decade) began when an employee named Monika Starke filed a complaint with the EEOC in 2005. She alleged that, over the course of her training as a truck driver, she was sexually harassed by two of her trainers. CRST denied the allegations. When the EEOC investigated, it discovered that four other employees had filed complaints. The EEOC ultimately found that there was reasonable cause to believe that an entire class of employees had been subjected to sexual harassment, and filed a lawsuit against CRST under Title VII on behalf of the aggrieved employees.

The EEOC eventually named more than 250 female employees of CRST as victims of sexual harassment. At trial, the District Court found that the EEOC had not satisfied its presuit requirements, and barred the EEOC from seeking relief for any of the employees. When CRST requested compensation for its EEOC discrimination case legal fees, the District Court approved the motion, and awarded CRST over $4 million in attorney’s fees.

An appeal, the Eighth Circuit found that CRST should not receive compensation for attorney’s fees. It reasoned that, due to precedent, only “prevailing” parties can receive compensation for attorney’s fees, and a party can only prevail if there has been a judicial determination of the plaintiff’s case on the merits. Because some of the complaints were thrown out due to the EEOC’s handling of the presuit requirements, the Court found that there had not been a ruling on the merits. According to the Court, there is a distinction between a ruling based on the elements of a claim (which would constitute a determination on the merits), and a ruling based on prerequisites to filing suit.

The Supreme Court disagreed, and held that there should be no requirement that a case be resolved “on the merits” in order for the defendant to be awarded attorney’s fees. According to the Court’s ruling, common sense dictates that a defendant has prevailed whenever a plaintiff’s claim has been rejected. The Court vacated the Eighth Circuit’s ruling, remanded the case for further proceedings, and urged the lower courts to expedite the resolution because the dispute has already taken so much time. [Read more…]

Filed Under: Blog, California Labor Law, Sexual Harassment Tagged With: California labor law attorney, Lakeport sexual harassment attorney, petaluma sexual harassment attorney, santa rosa sexual harassment attorney, sexual harassment, ukiah sexual harassment attorney

Sexual Harassment Claims and Franchisor Liability

September 15, 2015 by Beck Law P.C.

Sexual harassment claims and franchisor liability. If you are a franchisor and you have franchises in the state of California, you should be aware that you may be found liable if a sexual harassment claim is filed against you based on the conduct of one of your franchisees.

The Supreme Court of California’s decision in the case of Patterson v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC has shed some light on the circumstances in which a franchisor can be held liable. The ruling states that a franchisor will be liable for sexual harassment if “it has retained or assumed the right of general control over the relevant day-to-day operations at its franchised locations.”

The Sexual Harassment Case

The harassment claim was filed by an employee named Taylor Patterson who worked at a Domino’s Pizza franchise owned by a company named Sui Juris. Patterson filed a sexual harassment complaint under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) against Sui Juris, her supervisor, and Domino’s Pizza itself. Her complaint alleged that the supervisor groped her and made lewd comments and gestures. The complaint also alleged that she faced retaliation after her father reported the supervisor’s behavior to Domino’s human resources department and to the police.

Patterson argued that Domino’s Pizza was vicariously liable for her harassment because her supervisor was Domino’s “agent, employee, servant and joint venturer.” Her complaint also stated that her supervisor acted “within the course, scope, and authority of such agency, employment and joint venture, and within the consent and permission of” Domino’s Pizza.

At trial, Domino’s Pizza argued that it was not vicariously liable for the supervisor’s behavior because the Sui Juris franchise was a separate business, and thus Domino’s was not the supervisor’s employer. The trial court agreed and dismissed the action against Domino’s. An appeals court overturned the summary judgment, but the California Supreme Court ultimately agreed with the trial court’s original ruling.

What the Ruling Means For Future Franchisor Sexual Harassment Cases

In the opinion, the California Supreme Court held that Domino’s Pizza could not be held responsible for sexual harassment by a franchisee because Domino’s never assumed “the traditional right of general control” that an employer would typically have over its employees. The court emphasized that Sui Juris, rather than Domino’s, provided the employees with sexual harassment training, and that Domino’s was not involved in Sui Juris’s hiring process.

While the court dismissed the action against Domino’s, it also affirmed that there are circumstances in which a franchisor will be liable for the conduct of franchisees. The ruling establishes that a franchisor can be liable for such conduct if “it has retained or assumed the general right of control over factors such as hiring, direction, supervision, discipline, discharge, and relevant day-to-day aspects of the workplace behavior of the franchisee’s employees.” [Read more…]

Filed Under: Sexual Harassment Tagged With: business, franchise, sexual harassment

Sexual Harassment In The Workplace – Quid Pro Quo vs Hostile Work Environment

July 1, 2015 by Beck Law P.C.

When it comes to sexual harassment in the workplace, there are many people who can easily give examples of it, but know very little about sexual harassment law itself. An important, basic fact about sexual harassment law which very few people understand is that there are two different categories of sexual harassment cases: quid pro quo sexual harassment, and harassment that takes the form of a hostile work environment. Both of these types of harassment are prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and by the California Fair Housing and Employment Act (FEHA).

Quid Pro Quo

The term “quid pro quo” means “something for something” in Latin. Quid pro quo sexual harassment is when someone tries to obtain sexual favors from a coworker by abusing their workplace authority. This can be done with the offer of something positive (for example, “If you sleep with me, I’ll give you a raise”), or with the threat of something negative (for example, “If you don’t sleep with me, I’ll fire you.”)

“Sexual favors” does not necessarily have to mean sexual intercourse – or any kind of physical sex act, for that matter. Offering someone a promotion if they’ll talk dirty to you would be a form of quid pro quo sexual harassment. Telling a subordinate employee that you’ll cut their benefits if they don’t go on a date with you is also an example of quid pro quo sexual harassment, even though you weren’t specifically requesting sex from the employee.

If an employee is subjected to quid pro quo sexual harassment, s/he will not be prevented from filing a claim on the basis of whether or not s/he gave in to the harassment.

Hostile Work Environment

Sexual harassment that takes the form of a hostile work environment does not necessarily involve threats or propositions. A hostile work environment occurs when an employee is subjected to unwelcome sexual conduct in the workplace, and this conduct is severe and pervasive enough that it unreasonably interferes with the individual’s work performance, or it creates an abusive or offensive working environment.

This conduct can take many forms, including:

Sexual jokes, questions and/or comments
Displaying inappropriately sexual images (such as pornography)
Lewd behavior and/or gestures
Frequent, inappropriate physical contact
Repeated requests for dates
Physical interference with an employee’s movement

The Importance of Proper Legal Advice

If you believe that you have been the victim of sexual harassment in the workplace, an employment discrimination attorney will be able to answer your questions, and help you determine your best course of action. Likewise, if you are an employer, and you have concerns about sexual harassment in your workplace (or you have concerns about your sexual harassment policy), speaking to an attorney may help you avoid litigation, and better serve your employees.

The employment and labor law attorneys at Beck Law P.C. have considerable experience in sexual harassment cases. You can call or email today to schedule a consultation.

Filed Under: Sexual Harassment Tagged With: petaluma sexual harassment attorney, santa rosa sexual harassment attorney, ukiah sexual harassment attorney