An Administrator's Guide to California Private School Law

Chapter 7 - Recognizing And Preventing Harassment, Discrimination And Retaliation

Retaliation claims under this statute must be filed within 90 days of the alleged retaliatory conduct. 991

3. W ORKING C ONDITIONS Many state and federal statutes that regulate working conditions or create worker protections also prohibit retaliation against employees who seek to enforce those statutes. The list below is not exhaustive, but illustrates the range of employer conduct that may be subject to retaliation claims:

 Laws that entitle employees to family medical leave: Both the federal Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) 992 and California Family Rights Act (CFRA) 993 prohibit retaliation against employees who try to invoke their provisions. California Labor Code section 233(c) similarly prohibits employers from threatening to discipline, or disciplining, or in any way discriminating against, employees who use or who attempt to use Family Sick Leave. Additionally, California Labor Code section 234 expressly prohibits employers from counting Family Sick Leave toward absence control policies that may lead to or result in discipline, discharge, demotion, or suspension.  The Pregnancy Disability Law prohibits employers from terminating employees exercising their leave rights. 994  California’s military leave laws 995 and the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act 996 ensure that employees are not adversely affected in their employment after taking leave for military service.  Laws that regulate wages, including the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) 997 and the California Labor Code, protect employees who seek to enforce these laws. 998  Laws that regulate workplace safety and protect injured workers: CalOSHA 999 protect employees who take steps to expose unsafe working conditions in violation of the safety standards and procedures required by CalOSHA. 1000 Additionally, California Labor Code section 132a protects employees who file workers’ compensation claims from retaliation. Franklin v. Monadnock Co. 1001 An employee reported to his employer that a co-worker had threatened his safety, as well as that of three other employees, by stating he would have them killed. The employer did nothing in response. A week later, the co-worker tried to stab the complaining employee with a screwdriver. The employee complained to the police about the co-worker’s threats. The employer then terminated the employee for complaining about the co-worker. Employee’s allegations were sufficient to state a violation of public policy that protects an employee against discharge for making a good faith complaint about working conditions that he reasonably believes to be unsafe.

An Administrator’s Guide to California Private School Law ©2019 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 238