We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2024 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Kader v. Southern Cal. Med. Ctr.Inc., 99 Cal. App. 5th 214 (2024)

The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (9 U.S.C. §§ 401, et seq.) became effective on March 3, 2022. A “statutory note” to the Act states that the “Act shall apply with respect to any dispute or claim that arises or accrues on or after the

Aviles-Rodriguez v. Los Angeles Cmty. Coll. Dist., 2017 WL 3712199 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017)

Guillermo Aviles-Rodriguez was employed as a professor for the Los Angeles Community College District (“LACCD”). Although Aviles-Rodriguez was notified on March 5, 2014 that his tenure had been denied by the Board of Trustees of the LACCD, his employment did not end until June 30, 2014, which was the last day

In May 2017, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) approved new regulations regarding transgender identity and expression in the workplace. The regulations become effective July 1, 2017.

The new rules further expand the Fair Employment and Housing Act’s (FEHA) role in preventing discrimination in employment and housing on the basis of gender identity. In addition, the regulations describe some new policies that

Last month the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) announced the release of a new guide for California employers on the steps they should take to prevent and correct workplace harassment. The nine page document provides employers with a helpful FAQ-style guide to maintaining an effective anti-harassment program, appropriately responding to employee complaints, and conducting fair investigations.

The DFEH also issued a revised poster

Stiefel v. Bechtel Corp., 624 F.3d 1240 (2010)

James Richard Stiefel worked for Bechtel as an ironworker at a power plant. Five weeks before he was laid off, Stiefel injured his left hand while on the job. In his lawsuit, Stiefel alleged Bechtel laid him off as part of a “medical reduction in force,” which would result in cost savings to Bechtel under its

Westrec Marina Mgmt., Inc. v. Arrowood Indemn. Co., 163 Cal. App. 4th 1387 (2008)

Westrec sued its insurance carrier, Arrowood, after the carrier refused to provide a defense to an employment discrimination lawsuit on the ground that Westrec had failed to timely report the third-party claim as required under the terms of two successive directors and officers liability insurance policies issued by Arrowood. Bette