In the published portion of this opinion from the Fifth District Court of Appeal, one of the central issues was what constitutes an "employee" within the meaning of California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA, Government Code section 12940 et. seq.).
The plaintiff in this case was a temporary worker at Corcoran State Prison. She was a licensed clinical social worker working under contract in the Substance Abuse Treatment Facility of the prison.
She filed suit against the Department of Corrections alleging sexual harassment, a hostile work environment and retaliatory termination - all in violation of the FEHA.
A jury returned a verdict in her favor.
On appeal the State argued that, since she was not an "official" employee of the state for civil service and benefit purposes, she was not eligible for protection under the FEHA. It further argued that its own internal procedures (and the standard due process rights afforded the employee) were sufficient to protect the plaintiff and that, therefore, there was no need for the FEHA to cover the instant situation.
The appellate court held that the plaintiff was indeed covered under the Act:
"We also hold that, regardless of the size of the state bureaucracy and the due process protections given state employees, CDC had a duty to act immediately to stop the sexual harassment directed at Bradley by a coworker and to ensure that no further harassment occurred. Referring the matter to a lengthy and complicated investigative process alone is insufficient to comply with the protections mandated by the FEHA when continued contact with the harasser leads to further harassment."
The partially certified case is Bradley v. Cal. Department etc.
To read the full opinion,
PLEASE CLICK HERE.
- Help for the Injured Worker
