Recent Employment Law Decisions

California Courts of Appeal

The Unruh Civil Rights Act prohibits age-based pricing distinctions, even when supported by market research data. This case may be applicable to employment cases, such as when employers require older employees to pay more for health insurance.

CANDELORE v. TINDER, INC.

TINDER CHARGES OLDER SUBSCRIBERS MORE FOR ITS SERVICES

Tinder is a dating application, which subscribers use to find people whom they would like to date. Subscribers pay a monthly fee for the service, and can pay a higher fee for additional functions.

Tinder allegedly charged consumers $9.99 per month or $14.99 per month, depending on the features used, if they were 30 years old or younger. The complaint alleged that Tinder charged $19.99 per month for those who were 30 or older if they bought the additional functions.

THE PUTATIVE CLASS ALLEGED AGE DISCRIMINATION

Candelore represented a putative class of plaintiffs, alleging age discrimination in the pricing scheme. Tinder defended, stating that its market research showed that younger persons had less disposable income, and therefore needed a lower price to be willing to subscribe. Candelore alleged age Discrimination under the Unruh Act (Ca. Civ. Code §51) and the Unfair Competition Law (Ca. B&P Code §17200).

The trial court sustained Tinder’s demurrer without leave to amend, stating that the price difference was reasonably based on the market testing presented by Tinder.

THE UNRUH ACT PROHIBITS AGE DISCRIMINATION IF THERE IS NO OVERRIDING PUBLIC PURPOSE BEHIND IT

The appellate court reversed. Unruh Act’s delineation of protected characteristics, said the Court, is “illustrative rather than restrictive.” Therefore, although age is not specifically listed as a protected characteristic, the courts have recognized that the Unruh Act prohibits age-based discrimination.

Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Marina Point Ltd., v. Wolfson, 30 Cal.3d. 721 (1982), the Candelore Court pointed out that discrimination occurs when generalizations impact individuals. “Even a true generalization about the class is an insufficient reason for disqualifying an individual to whom the generalization does not apply.” Id. at 740.

Therefore, the court ruled, because previous courts have determined that pricing differentials can constitute actionable discrimination, even a true generalization about older persons having more disposable income cannot justify charging them more for a service under the Unruh Act.

CONCLUSION: Generalizations will not justify discrimination under the Unruh Act if they affect individuals to whom they do not apply. This same reasoning should apply to the Fair Employment & Housing Act, as well as other anti-discrimination statutes with similar public policy purposes.

Ca. Ct. App., 1/30/18

Read All Decisions

Legislative Update
By Mariko Yoshihara

Mariko Yoshihara

The legislature was back in full throttle as it reconvened for the new year, keeping CELA’s legislative committee busy at work tracking and advising on dozens of newly proposed employment legislation.  Over the next few weeks, the Legislature will introduce hundreds of new bills to meet the February 16th bill introduction deadline, many of which will impact the work of CELA lawyers.

One of the top priority issues for the legislature this year is to strengthen sexual harassment protections in California, in response to the wave of #metoo stories that have highlighted the pervasive nature of sexual harassment in the workplace (including within the state Capitol).  Over the past few months, CELA has been working closely with the legislature on various proposals to address sexual harassment and strengthen protections.  In December, CELA’s outgoing President, Jean Hyams, testified at a legislative hearing to help advise the legislature on how to properly and effectively respond to sexual harassment complaints arising in the Legislature.  In January, CELA’s now current President, Wendy Musell, testified in a legislative hearing on the legal standards for sexual harassment claims and advised on how our laws could and should better protect victims of harassment.

As a result of our ongoing work with the legislature and our organizational allies on this very important topic, legislation this year to address sexual harassment will include bills to lengthen the statute of limitations for claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act; limit secret settlements of sexual harassment claims; improve sexual harassment training requirements; strengthen record-retention and reporting requirements for harassment complaints; prohibit retaliation against workers who refuse to sign arbitration agreements; and provide more rights and protections to employees in the state legislature. In the next few weeks and months, we can expect even more bills to be introduced to further address sexual harassment.

In addition to sexual harassment legislation, CELA’s legislative committee will be working on dozens of other bills this year to expand the rights of workers, including bills on wage theft and pay equity.  The committee will also be focused on defeating efforts by business groups that attempt to threaten those rights and weaken enforcement.  Specifically, CELA has already been at work with ally organizations to oppose legislation and three proposed ballot initiatives that would significantly weaken the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA).  These efforts have paid off — since the start of the new year, the pending PAGA bill and all three initiatives have been pulled from consideration.  Despite these early wins, we anticipate seeing many more menacing attempts to threaten PAGA over the course of this year, and we will continue our fight to preserve it.

In more good news, earlier this month, the Governor released his final budget plan for fiscal year 2018–19, providing $150 million in new funding for local trial court operations and a commitment to fund construction for ten new courthouse projects.  The Chief Justice made the following comment on the governor’s proposed budget:

“I thank Governor Brown for this very strong budget proposal for the Judicial Branch. The laws promise liberty and protection for all Californians, and our courts ensure that the promise of the law is fulfilled. With this proposed budget, the courts will be better equipped to truly provide access to justice for all.”

—Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye

The Governor’s proposed FY 2018–19 budget may be reviewed at: www.ebudget.ca.gov.

Bills We Are Tracking

Thank you to all the CELA members who have helped support our legislative efforts.  With our strong grassroots efforts, we can effect broad scale change!  For a full list of bills we are tracking, please visit www.cela.org/legislation.  If you have experience with any of the legislative issues listed or if you have any feedback you would like to share, please email me at mariko@cela.org.

AB 403    (Melendez R)   Legislature: Legislative Employee Whistleblower Protection Act.

Current Text: Amended: 1/29/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Would impose criminal and civil liability on a Member of the Legislature or legislative employee, as defined, who interferes with, or retaliates against, a legislative employee’s exercise of the right to make a protected disclosure, which is defined as a good faith allegation made by a legislative employee to specified entities that a Member of the Legislature or a legislative employee has engaged in, or will engage in, activity that may constitute a violation of law, including sexual harassment, or a violation of a legislative standard of conduct.

AB 1750    (McCarty D)   Elected officials: sexual harassment settlement agreements: liability.

Current Text: Introduced: 1/3/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Would express the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would require an elected official to reimburse a public entity that pays any compromise or settlement of a claim or action involving conduct that constitutes sexual harassment, if an investigation reveals evidence supporting the claim of sexual harassment against the elected official.

AB 1761    (Muratsuchi D)   Employee safety: hotel workers.

Current Text: Introduced: 1/4/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Would require, among other things, that a hotel employer, as defined, provide its employees with a panic button, as specified, in order to summon assistance when working alone in the guestroom. The bill would require a hotel employer to compile and maintain a list of guests who have been alleged to have committed an act of violence or harassment against employees at that hotel, as specified, and to decline service to any person on that list for a period of 3 years.

AB 1870    (Reyes D)   Employment discrimination: unlawful employment practices.

Current Text: Introduced: 1/12/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Current law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, makes specified employment and housing practices unlawful, including discrimination against or harassment of employees and tenants, among others. Current law authorizes a person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice to file a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing within one year from the date upon which the unlawful practice occurred, unless otherwise specified. This bill would extend the period to 3 years for which complaints alleging unlawful employment or housing practices may be filed with the department, as specified.

AB 1938    (Burke D)   Employment discrimination: familial status.

Current Text: Introduced: 1/25/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Current law prohibits, among other things, an employer to make any nonjob-related inquiry, either verbally or on an application form, that expresses any limitation, specification, or limitation based upon, among other things, a person’s race, religion, national origin, or gender. This bill would, in addition, prohibit an employer or other covered entity from making a nonjob-related injury to, or expressing any limitation, specification, or limitation based upon a person’s familial status, as defined. The bill would make related findings and declarations.

SB 183    (Lara D)   State buildings: federal immigration agents.

Current Text: Amended: 1/22/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Would prohibit federal immigration enforcement agents, officers, or personnel from entering a building owned and occupied, or leased and occupied, by the state, a public school, or a campus of the California Community Colleges, to perform surveillance, effectuate an arrest, or question an individual therein, without a valid federal warrant, and would limit the activities therein of federal immigration enforcement agents, officers, or personnel with a warrant to the individual who is the subject of the warrant.

SB 224    (Jackson D)   Personal rights: sexual harassment.

Current Text: Amended: 1/3/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Would include an investor, elected official, lobbyist, director, and producer among those listed persons who may be liable to a plaintiff for sexual harassment.

SB 419    (Portantino D)   Legislature: Legislative Sexual Harassment Retaliation Prevention Act.

Current Text: Amended: 1/24/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Current law establishes a cause of action for violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Current law also separately establishes liability for sexual harassment if a plaintiff proves specified elements, including, among other things, that there is a business, service, or professional relationship between the plaintiff and defendant. This bill would declare that neither house of the Legislature may retaliate against a legislative advocate or employee, as defined, because that person has opposed any practices forbidden under the above provisions, or filed a complaint, testified, or assisted in any proceeding relating to a complaint of harassment under those provisions.

SB 820    (Leyva D)   Settlement agreements: confidentiality.

Current Text: Introduced: 1/3/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Current law prohibits a provision in a settlement agreement that prevents the disclosure of factual information related to the action in a civil action with a factual foundation establishing a cause of action for civil damages for certain enumerated sexual offenses. This bill would similarly provide that, a provision in a settlement agreement that prevents the disclosure of factual information relating to the action is prohibited, unless a claimant requests the inclusion of such a provision, if the pleadings state a cause of action relating to specified claims of sexual assault, sexual harassment, or harassment or discrimination based on sex. The bill would make a provision in a settlement agreement that prevents the disclosure of factual information related to the action, as described in the bill, entered into on or after January 1, 2019, void as a matter of law and against public policy

SB 829    (Wiener D)   Employee housing: farmworker housing.

Current Text: Introduced: 1/3/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would expand the Employee Housing Act to (1) further incentivize the creation of farmworker housing in agricultural communities, (2) authorize the Department of Housing and Community Development to partner private agricultural operators with independent nonprofits that will manage and operate residences, and (3) preserve and protect the civil rights of tenants living in employee housing.

SB 937    (Wiener D)   Lactation accommodation.

Current Text: Introduced: 1/25/2018   html   pdf

Summary:
Would require a lactation room or location to include prescribed features and would require an employer to provide access to a sink and refrigerator in close proximity to the employee’s work space. The bill would establish a procedure for an employer with fewer than 5 employees to apply to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement for an undue hardship exemption from the lactation room or location requirement. The bill would require an employer to develop and implement a policy regarding lactation accommodation and make it available to employees, as specified.

Lobby Day

On Tuesday, March 13th CELA members will take to the halls of the state capitol, meeting with members of the legislature to discuss CELA’s top priorities, including sexual harassment protections, gender pay equity, wage theft, and forced arbitration! This will be an exciting opportunity for CELA members to meet and network with legislators and their staffs.

New to CELA, a political novice, or both? No problem! We will have a comprehensive pre-lobby day webinar to get you up to speed on the legislative process and the workers’ rights legislation we will be discussing in our meetings.

Get more information and register online here by Friday, March 2nd!

 

Read More

Read Full Article