On July 13, 2013, in an unpublished decision, the Second Court of Appeal reversed a lower court’s decision to dismiss a sexual harassment case on the grounds that plaintiff had not adequately pleaded a “hostile environment” theory. For those interested in understanding what employers should not do in response to a harassment or discrimination complaint,
Harassment
Who’s the Boss? New Bill Seeks to Redefine “Supervisor” Under Title VII
Last year, the Supreme Court finally clarified the long open question: “Who is a Supervisor under Title VII?” As discussed in our previous post, in Vance, the Supreme Court held that a supervisor is someone who is “empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions” against a complaining employee. Essentially, a “supervisor”…
Weintraub Tobin’s 2014 Labor & Employment Seminars and Training Schedule
Hot off the print press – Weintraub Tobin’s 2014 Labor and Employment Training and Seminar Schedule is now available. Click here for a copy of the schedule.
Our Employment Law Update is scheduled for January 16, 2014 (Sacramento) and January 23, 2014 (San Francisco). Seating is limited so register early to reserve your spot.
Please…
Mandatory AB 1825 Sexual Harassment Prevention Training
Summary of Program
The regulations regarding California’s Mandatory Sexual Harassment Prevention Training for supervisors require that certain employers provide training to their supervisors every two years.
The Labor and Employment Group at Weintraub Tobin Chediak Coleman Grodin is offering a two hour in-person training session that will comply with all the requirements outlined in the regulations.
Date: December 4, 2013
Time: 9:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.
Location: Weintraub Tobin, 400 Capitol Mall, 11th Floor, Sacramento, CA
Charge: $75.00 per supervisor.
For more information and to register for this seminar, please click here.
Continue Reading Mandatory AB 1825 Sexual Harassment Prevention Training
Who is the Supervisor? Supreme Court Resolves Long Simmering Question Under Title VII
By: Chuck Post
In Vance v. Ball State University, the Supreme Court clarified a long open question, “Who is a supervisor under Title VII?” The question is important because employers are directly responsible for employee harassment by a supervisor. In the case of worker harassment of a co-worker, however, employer liability is less direct.