Weintraub Tobin’s 2018 Labor and Employment Seminar and Training schedule is now available.  Click here for a copy of the schedule.

If you have any questions on any of our seminars or would like to inquire on private, custom-tailored training, please contact:

Ramona Carrillo

(916) 558-6046

rcarrillo@weintraub.com

At its meeting on July 17, 2017, the Fair Employment and Housing Council (FEHC) addressed a conflict between its regulations and OSHA’s regulations, regarding gender-neutral restroom facilities.

AB 1732, enacted as Health and Safety Code section 118600, which applies to single-user toilet facilities.  Section 118600 defines single-user toilet facilities as those that have only one

The new regulations that expand existing protections under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) for transgender individuals and others go into effect July 1, 2017.  As California employers know, FEHA prohibits harassment and discrimination against individuals on the basis of many protected classes, including gender, gender identity, and gender expression.  Below is a brief

The Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) recently issued new guidance for employers to prevent discrimination against transgender employees, who are protected under California’s Fair Employment & Housing Act (“FEHA”). Since 2012, FEHA protection has been extended to include gender identity and gender expression categories, and defines “gender expression” to mean a “person’s gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.” The DFEH’s new brochure, called “Transgender Rights in the Workplace” (available here), makes clear that employers must allow transgender employees access to restroom, shower, locker room and other such facilities that correspond with their gender identity. It also suggests that providing individual or unisex restrooms, where possible, can enhance privacy for all employees.

Continue Reading DFEH Releases New Guidance Regarding Transgender Employees

This bill was in direct response to the decision in Rope v. Auto-Clor System of Washington, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 635 (2013), which found that an employee who merely makes a request forBeth-West-15_web an accommodation does not engage in protected activity for purposes of a FEHA retaliation claim.  Under this bill, the Government Code