Labor Employment Law Blog

On August 9, 2007, the Ninth Circuit held in Craig v. M & O Agencies that an employee's 19-day delay in reporting blatant sexually offensive and unacceptable behavior by a direct supervisor did not necessarily constitute an unreasonable failure to take advantage of the preventative or corrective opportunities provided by the employer. Thus, the employer could not avoid a trial under Title VII for the supervisor's actions.   

On July 18, 2007, California's Office of Administrative Law approved, with minor modification, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission's sexual harassment training and education regulations.  The newly approved regulations will become effective August 17, 2007.  The regulations clarify employers' obligations to provide supervisors with sexual harassment training under the Fair Employment & Housing Act ("FEHA").

Workplace romances not only provide an endless stream of water-cooler gossip, they also raise numerous legal concerns, such as those dealing with privacy, sexual harassment, and unlawful termination.  More and more employers seek to limit their exposure to the legal liability and morale problems that result from disintegrated interpersonal relationships in the workplace by adopting policies that ban fraternization between co-workers.  However, a recent federal decision held that a blanket, non-fraternization policy that "implicitly" precluded employees from engaging in union or concerted activity was unenforceable in violation of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA").

Recently in Walsh v. Nevada Department of Human Resources, Division of Healthcare, Finance and Policy, et al. (No. 04-17440) the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that individuals cannot be personally liable for damages in discrimination suits brought pursuant to Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12117.  Prior to the Walsh decision, the Ninth Circuit had never addressed the issue of personal liability under Title I of the ADA.  In Walsh, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that Congress did not intend to allow individuals to be personally liable for discrimination under Title I of the ADA because the statute expressly limits liability to employers with 15 or more workers.  Previously, other Circuit Courts had reached similar conclusions.

On November 14, 2006, California's Fair Employment and Housing Commission ("FEHC") adopted its October 2, 2006, modified harassment training regulations as its final proposed regulations.  The regulations interpret the sexual harassment training requirements set forth in California Government Code Section 12950.1.

On April 20, 2006, the California Supreme Court issued an eagerly awaited decision in the case of Amani Lyle v. Warner Brothers Television Productions, the company which wrote and produced the popular television show Friends.

The plaintiff, an African-American woman, was hired by Warner Brothers to attend and transcribe show writers' meetings. She was terminated after four months of employment because of problems with her typing and transcription. Subsequently, she sued, asserting a host of employment-related causes of action, including racial and sexual harassment, race and sex discrimination, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, and retaliation for making complaints of purportedly unlawful behavior.

On December 16, 2005, California's Fair Housing and Employment Commission ("the Commission") issued proposed regulations which clarify employers' obligations to provide supervisors with sexual harassment training under the Fair Employment & Housing Act ("FEHA"). Pursuant to the FEHA, employers with 50 or more employees are required to provide two hours of sexual harassment training and education to all supervisory employees at least once before January 1, 2006 and at least once every two years thereafter.

The California Supreme Court unanimously held that sufficiently widespread sexual favoritism can convey a demeaning message to female employees that they are viewed by management as "sexual playthings," creating an actionable hostile work environment under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"). Miller v. Department of Corrections, No. S114097 (July 18, 2005). The decision reversed the 3rd District Court of Appeal's unanimous 2003 panel decision that upheld a Sacramento Superior Court's grant of summary judgment.

Q. Are employers required to provide sexual harassment training to supervisory employees?