190 | 2023 Cal-Peculiarities ©2023 Seyfarth Shaw LLP www.seyfarth.com 128 Gov’t Code § 12940(k). 129 Gov’t Code § 12940(j)(1), (3). 130 Flait v. N. Am. Watch Corp., 3 Cal. App. 4th 467, 476 (1992) (citing Gov’t Code § 12940(h)) (emphasis included in original). 131 Id. at 475. 132 Id. at 477. 133 Gov’t Code § 12950(b). The fact sheet (DFEH-185) is available at https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/Posters/?openTab=1 (visited Mar. 10, 2023). 134 Gov’t Code §§ 12950 and 12950.1. The DFEH must make available a one-hour and a two-hour on-line training course that employers can use and must make the training videos, existing informational posters, fact sheets, and on-line training courses available in multiple languages. Gov’t Code § 12950.1(j), (k). 135 Gov’t Code § 12950.1(a). 136 Gov’t Code § 12950.1(a)(1), (3). 137 Gov’t Code § 12950.1(a)(1), (2), (3). 138 Gov’t Code § 12950.1(f). 139 Id. 140 The DFEH accepts complaints from employees that their employers have not complied with the law requiring that sexual harassment prevention training be provided. Such complaints filed after January 1, 2020 will be reviewed in light of the totality of the circumstances, which may include the availability of the DFEH’s on-line training courses or the availability of qualified trainers. If the DFEH finds that the law has been violated, then it will work with employers to obtain compliance with the law. 141 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 110234, available at https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/shpt (visited Mar. 10, 2023). 142 Id. § 11024(a)(1), (3). 143 Id. § 11024(a)(4)(A); cf. Clopton v. Global Computer Assocs., 4 AD Cases 360 (C.D. Cal. 1995) (five-employee FEHA jurisdictional threshold means employees within California). 144 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 11024(a)(4), (9). 145 Id. § 11024 (a)(12). 146 Id. § 11024 (a)(2)(B). 147 Id. § 11024 (a)(2)(F). See also id. § 11024 (c)(2). 148 SB 970, 2018 bill adding Gov’t Code § 12950.3. (The DFEH can seek an order requiring an employer to comply with these requirements.) 149 Gov’t Code § 12950.2 (“practical guidance on how to enable bystanders to recognize potentially problematic behavior and to motivate bystanders to take action when they observe problematic behaviors”). 150 See https://mandatedreporterca.com/training/general-training (visited Mar. 10, 2023). 151 AB 1963, 2020 bill amending Penal Code § 11165.7 to expand the list of mandated reporters to include human resource employees of a business of five or more employees that employs minors, as well as adults whose duties require direct contact with and supervision of minors in the performance of the minors’ duties in the workplace. 152 Gov’t Code § 12950.1(h)(2). 153 See Lab. Code §§ 1420-1434. 154 AB 547, 2019 bill amending Lab. Code §§ 1420, 1425, 1429, 1429.5, 1431, and 1432. 155 Lab. Code § 1700.50 et seq. Talent agencies must retain, for three years, records showing that those educational materials were provided. 156 AB 3175, 2020 bill amending Lab. Code § 1700.52, effective September 25, 2020, to require that a parent or legal guardian accompany age-eligible minors during employer-provided sexual harassment training made available on-line by the DFEH, and to certify to the Labor Commissioner that the training has been completed. 157 SB 530, 2019 bill amending Gov’t Code § 12950.1(l) and adding Lab Code § 107.5 et seq. 158 AB 241, 2019 bill amending Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 2190.1, 3524.5 and adding § 2736.5(c) (requiring Board of Registered Nursing and the Physician Assistant Board to adopt regulations requiring implicit bias training by January 1, 2022). 159 Thompson v. City of Monrovia, 186 Cal. App. 4th 860, 880 (2010); Trujillo v. N. Cnty. Transit Dist., 63 Cal. App. 4th 280, 289 (1998). See also Dickson v. Burke Williams, Inc., 234 Cal. App. 4th 1307, 1309 (2015) (reversing judgment for massage therapist alleging sexual harassment at work; “there cannot be a valid claim for failure to take reasonable steps necessary to prevent sexual harassment if, as here, the jury finds that the sexual harassment that occurred was not sufficiently severe or pervasive as to result in liability”). 160 DFEH v. Lyddan Law Grp., LLP, FEHC Dec. No. 10-04-P (Oct. 19, 2010) (respondent had no written anti-harassment policy or employee handbook, conducted no harassment prevention training, and did not independently investigate employee’s complaints; FEHC imposed injunctive relief). See also 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 11023(a)(3) (“Department may independently seek non-monetary preventative remedies for a violation of Government Code section 12940(k) whether or not the Department prevails on an underlying claim of discrimination, harassment, or retaliation”). 161 See, e.g., Mendoza v. W. Med. Ctr. Santa Ana, 222 Cal. App. 4th 1334, 1344-45 (2014) (plaintiff’s expert witness noted “numerous shortcomings in the investigation” into the plaintiff’s complaint of harassment; “lack of a rigorous investigation by defendants is evidence suggesting that defendants did not value the discovery of the truth so much as a way to clean up the mess” uncovered by the plaintiff’s complaint; “more thorough investigation might have disclosed additional character and credibility evidence for defendants to consider
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4