ACSA Personnel Institute - Schedschd.ws/hosted_files/2016personnelinstitute/6c/ACSA 2016... · ACSA Personnel Institute ... the workplace by determining what reasonable ... • Effective

ACSA Personnel Institute

Exploring the Depths of

Disability Discrimination

October 6, 2016

Katy A. Suttorp

Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP

1851 East First Street, Suite 1550

Santa Ana, CA 92705

Telephone: 949.863.3363

1Copyright © 2016 by Katy A. Suttorp, Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP. All rights reserved.

• Disability Basics

• Challenge One: “Abuse” of Leave

• Challenge Two: Effective Documentation

• Challenge Three:

Uncooperative Employees

• Challenge Four: Retaliation

Claims

• Case Studies


Disability Basics

• What exactly is a “disability”?

– FEHA: A physical or mental impairment that limits a major life activity (or regarded as or episodic)

– Title VII/ADA: A physical or mental condition that substantially limits a major life activity (or regarded as, history or transitory)

Disability Basics

• What is a “major life activity”?

– Walking

– Talking

– Seeing

– Hearing

– Learning

– Concentrating

– Communicating

– Interacting with others

– Performing manual tasks

– Working

• “Disability” includes:

– Intellectual/Cognitive

– Autism Spectrum Disorders

– Anxiety, Clinical Depression, Bi-Polar

– Physical Injuries

– Neurological Disorders

– Blood or Viral Conditions

– Pregnancy Complications

– NOTE: Current drug use is NOT considered a disability


• A person who has a disability;

• A person with a record of

disability;

• A person who is perceived to have a disability; and

• A person associated with a person who has a

disability or a record of disability or is perceived to have a disability.

Who Do Disability

Laws Protect?

• What is the “Interactive Process”?

– The interactive process is the mechanism for facilitating the integration of disabled employees into the workplace by determining what reasonable accommodation, if any, will permit the employee to perform the essential functions of the position.

• When to Initiate the Interactive Process:

– Employee with known disability requests an accommodation

– Employer becomes aware of the (potential) need to accommodate

– Employee’s health care provider issues restrictions

– Exhaustion of leave


Disability Basics

• When to Initiate the Interactive Process:

– Employee mentions inability to perform a specific job task, even if not tied to a disability

– Employee mentions disability, even if previously unknown or not apparent

– Threats of violence?

Disability Basics

• Tips for Getting it Right:

– Engaging is mandatory

– Do it in person

– Be cooperative

– Burden is not on the employee to identify the reasonable accommodations

– Employer must consider allreasonable accommodations

• Tips for Getting it Right:

– Permit the employee to bring a representative

– Have at least two employer representatives (i.e., HR and supervisor)

– Avoid making promises

– Avoid making assumptions

– Provide reasons why an accommodation is rejected

– Document the meeting


Disability Basics

• Determining the Essential Functions:

• Employer’s judgment

• Written job description

• Amount of time spent performing the function

• Job function analysis

• Consequences of not requiring that function to be performed

• Terms of CBA or MOU

• What is an “Essential Function”?

– Position exists to perform that function;

– Limited number of employees to whom that function can be distributed;

– Function is specialized.

• What is a “Reasonable Accommodation”?

– Any appropriate measure that would allow the employee to perform the essential functions;

• May include modifying work schedules, buying or modifying

equipment, modifying job duties,

and providing intermittent or extended leaves of absence


• Common Defenses:

– Employee did not have a disability

– Undue hardship

– Employee could not perform essential functions, even with a reasonable accommodation

– Requested accommodation poses threat to employee or others

• Assuming Worker’s Compensation is the exclusive remedy for work-related injuries.

• Following a 100% health rule before returning an employee to work.

• Failing to consider all vacant positions.

• Assuming that $$ = undue hardship

Common Mistakes

• Claiming the employee cannot perform the essential functions when the employee has done so in the past.

• Refusing to grant a reasonable accommodation due to inflexible reliance on employer rules.

Common Mistakes


• Asserting an essential

functions defense based

on a job description that

does not accurately reflect

the employee’s duties.

• Asserting an essential

functions defense without

considering the ease or

availability of certain

accommodations.

Common Mistakes

• Hiring, reinstatement, or training

• Monetary damages (including lost wages

and benefits)

• Compensatory

damages for pain, suffering, humiliation or emotional distress

• Attorney’s fees.

Potential Damages


Taking a High Amount of Sick

Leave

vs.

Abuse of Leave

What is Abuse

of Sick Leave?

• Ask What is Wrong

• Single Out/Treat Differently

• Question Need for Leave without Strong Evidence of Possible Abuse

• Implement Special Directives without Strong, Legitimate, Business Reason

• Change Policy without Bargaining with Union

• Reference Protected Leaves in Performance Evaluations

Consider that the Employee Could Have a

Disability that Requires a Reasonable

Accommodation.

Engage in the Interactive Process – Even Without a

Request from the Employee.

ADA/FEHA


Consider that the Employee Could Need

FMLA/CFRA Leave –Continuous or Intermittent.

Always Send Eligibility Notice and Certification

when Employee is Absent for 3+ Days.

FMLA/CFRA

Things to Do

• Educate Supervisors

• Ensure that Supervisors

Involve HR in the Process

• Require that Doctor’s

Notes and Other

Information on Sick Leave Goes to HR, not

Just to Supervisors

Identifying Potential Abuse of Sick Leave

• Non-Compliance with Attendance/Leave Policies:

– Doctor’s Note Requirements

– Call In/ Notice Requirements

– Appropriate Reasons for Use of Sick Leave

• But first consider:– California law (e.g. Healthy

Workplaces, Healthy Families)

– CBAs

– Other policies and practices


Abuse of Leave

• Suspicious Use of Sick

Leave:

– Patterns

– Calling in Sick When

Vacation Request was Denied

– Calling in Sick During a

Known Unpopular Assignment

• Good Policy

• Good Forms

• Track It

– HR Should Track, Even for Exempt

• Consistency in Treatment

• Watch For and Document Patterns

• Issue Specific Directives (upon strong evidence of abuse)

• Discipline (up to, and including, termination)


No Documentation =

No Evidence

Bad Documentation

= Bad Evidence

Good Documentation

= Good Evidence

Litigation

Evidence

• Created Contemporaneously

with the Event

• Believable

• Accurate

• Factual

• Unbiased

• Professional

Characteristics of

Effective Documentation

• Will the Employee

Understand it?

• How Does it Make

You Look to…

– A Judge?

– A Jury?

– The Public?

Know Your

Audience


• Will the Document Make Sense to

Someone Completely Unfamiliar with the Job?

• Will the Document Make Sense to You in

the Future?

Context is Key

Private & Privileged Documentation

• Treat your documents as private

• Make available only to those with a legitimate need

• Keep medical records separate from personnel records

• Label attorney-client-privileged documents

• Protects information communicated in confidence

to the attorney and the legal advice received in return

• Protects only communications between the attorney and client

• Does not protect underlying facts Upjohn v. U.S. (1981) 449 U.S. 383


• A pre-existing document not prepared in conjunction

with the rendering of legal advice is likely not protected, even if in the

custody of the attorney and relevant to the attorney’s advice.

• Disclosure to third parties = Waiver of privilege.

Medical information and/or records obtained during the interactive process shall be

maintained on separate forms, and in medical files separate from the

employee's personnel file, and shall be kept confidential, except that:

1) supervisors and managers may be informed of restriction(s) on the work or duties of employees with disabilities and

necessary reasonable accommodations; and

2) first aid and safety personnel may be informed, where appropriate, that the

condition may require emergency treatment; and

3) government officials investigating compliance with this subchapter shall be

provided relevant information on request.

Medical Privacy2 CCR § 7294.0(g)

Essential Elements of Good Documentation

• Date

• Author

• Identify, Quote, and Attach Policies, Rules, or Other Exhibits

• FACTS!!!!

• Provide Context

• Outline Consequences

• Highlight Your Policy/Legal Compliance


Essential Elements of Good Documentation

• Don’t Be Mean

• Don’t Make Value

Judgments

• Use Professional Tone

• Proofread

• Spell Check

• Use Complete Sentences

• Grammar

• Have a Note Taker at Meetings

• Avoid Recording

• Use Email Appropriately

– Print Them for File

• Use Your Calendar

• Create Log of Calls

• Transcribe Voicemails

A Good Foundation

Things to Document

• All Steps in the

Interactive Process

• All Offers of Reasonable

Accommodation

• LOA Granted/Denied

• Analysis of

Qualifications for

Transfer


Things to Document

• Job Descriptions

– Current

– Accurate

– Reviewed by Supervisors

– Highlight Required Physical and Mental Requirements of the Job

• Job Function Analysis

The interactive process is the mechanism for

facilitating the integration of disabled employees into

the workplace by determining what

reasonable accommodation, if any, will

permit them to perform the essential functions of

the position

Interactive Process


• Interactive Process Requires the Employee’s

Participation

– Job Function Analysis

– Meetings with Employer

– Providing Medical Information/Restrictions

– Providing Qualifications for other Open Positions

An employee who

refuses to cooperate can end the

employer’s

obligation to engage in the interactive

process.

Failure to

Participate in the Interactive Process

• What if the employee wants a different

accommodation than the employer?

• What if the employee rejects the offered accommodation?

• What if the accommodation stops working?


• Contact the employee

– Phone

– Email/Letters

– Multiple contacts are better

– In writing is best

• Detail what the employer has done to meet its burden

• Detail what you need from the employee

• Explain consequences of failure to cooperate

Communicate

• If…– Employee Cannot be

Accommodated

OR– Employee Will Not

Cooperate

• Explore Potential Options to End

End the Process?

• Certificated or Classified Employees – Due Process Required

– Summarize process

– Produce information relied upon to

make determination

– Provide opportunity for employee to

respond

– Evidentiary appeal process

• Administrative or Contract Employees

– Written notice

– Explanation of why accommodation

not possible


• Plaintiff Engaged in Protected Activity;

• Employer Subjected Plaintiff to An Adverse

Employment Action; and

• A Causal Link Exists Between the Protected Activity and the

Employer’s Action.

Prima Facie Case

• Taking a leave of absence

• Requesting an accommodation

• Filing a good faith complaint

• Testifying, assisting, or participating in proceedings or hearings

• Opposing an act the employee reasonably believes is unlawful

Protected Activity


• Termination

• Demotion

• Failure to promote

• Refusal to hire

• Poor evaluation

• Unwarranted criticism or ostracism

• Denial of privileges, such as overtime

• Denial of leave

Adverse

Employment Action

• Direct Evidence– Statements By The

Supervisor Taking Discipline• Caution: Employer

Still Liable If Supervisor Not Aware of Protected Activity but Relied Upon A Subordinate Manager without Further Inquiry

Causal Connection

• Circumstantial Evidence – Examples:

– Employer Knowledge of Protected Activity AND

– Proximity in Time OR A Pattern of Conduct Consistent with Retaliatory Intent

Causal Connection


An employee can establish retaliation for

making a complaint even where the

employee cannot

establish the underlying harassment

or discrimination

occurred

Relationship to

Harassment & Discrimination

• Action was justified by a legitimate, non-retaliatory

reason

– Employee can defeat by showing the stated reason was a pretext:

• Reason was false or unpersuasive

• Similarly situated employees were treated differently

• Effective Documentation

• Always Consider the End-Game Early

• Make Sure Your Policies are Updated and Accurate

• Educate Supervisors

• Be Consistent

• Be Patient and Cautious


Sally has worked as a non-exempt clerical assistant in the District’s accounting department for 10 years and is a member of the District’s general employee union. District policy provides for 15 sick days a year and places no cap on accrual. Recently, the District unilaterally changed its policy and started to require a doctor’s note for any day charged as a sick day. Last year, Sally began working a 9/80 schedule where she has every other Friday off. She currently has 345 hours of sick leave banked.

Sally’s supervisor has noticed recently that Sally is calling in sick on Mondays following her Fridays off of work. He decides not to document his observations because Sally is a long-term employee, who responds to his emails when she is not in the office, and she calls in before her scheduled shift as required by District policy.

Continued …


1. Is Sally’s calling in sick on

Mondays following her regular Fridays off an abuse of sick leave?

2. Should her supervisor document

his observations?

3. Should he talk to her?

4. Should Sally be responding to

emails when she is out sick?

5. Should the change in attendance policy have been negotiated with

the union?

6. Is the District’s requirement that

every employee bring in a doctor’s note for every absence

reasonable?

Questions …

Sally’s supervisor decides to question

her about the Mondays she has been

calling in sick. When he asks her for doctor’s notes for those days off, Sally

replies that she had allergies or a

headache, and did not actually see a

doctor. However, she insists that she

was in fact sick.

Sally’s supervisor decides not to

write her up or report the issue to

Human Resources, deciding instead

to mention Sally’s attendance

problems in her performance review at the end of the year.

1. Should Sally’s supervisor have insisted on the required documentation?

2. Should Sally’s supervisor have reported this to HR?

3. Would it be proper for Sally’s supervisor to criticize her attendance in her performance review?

Questions …


Several months later, Sally’s supervisor notices that she seems to be coming in late a lot, taking much longer breaks and lunches than usual, and she seems really tired. In fact, another employee reported that he saw Sally sleeping in her car, and another reported that she has been seen crying in the bathroom. She has also been calling in sick, sometimes for a few days at a time, no longer just on the Mondays following her Fridays off.

1. Should Sally’s supervisor approach her and ask her what’s wrong?

2. Should Sally’s supervisor request a fitness for duty exam?

3. Should Sally be disciplined for the tardiness, long breaks, and long lunches?

Questions …

During lunch one day, Sally shares with her co-workers that her daughter suffers

from bi-polar disorder and has been keeping her up at all hours of the night. She also explains to them that she has

been taking her daughter to therapeutic activities recommended by her

daughter’s doctor, such as horseback riding and yoga, and that is why she is calling in sick but doesn’t have a note

from her own doctor. Sally’s co-workers are annoyed that they have to cover

Sally’s work while she is off “having fun” with her daughter, so they complain to

Sally’s supervisor.


1. When the employees complain to the supervisor, does he have enough information to approach Sally about a potential LOA?

2. Is Sally entitled to a LOA to care for her daughter? Entitled to reasonable accommodation?

3. What kind of documentation would Sally need to provide?

Questions …

Sally submits the required LOA paperwork to

HR, who grants her a reduced schedule. Six months into her LOA Sally has taken 100

hours of leave time. As the year end

approaches, Sally’s supervisor has grown frustrated with her coming in late, not being

reliable or productive, and her

communication when she’s out of the office having become negligible. In her

performance evaluation, he gives her high

marks for job knowledge and skills and length of service, but very low marks on

productivity. He also writes, “Sally has not

been a good communicator” and “Sally needs to consider her priorities.”

1. Should Sally’s performance

score for productivity be docked if her lack of

productivity was due to the

time off she needed to care for her daughter?

2. Should she be docked for not

checking email while she is out

caring for her daughter?

3. Are the comments by Sally’s supervisor that she is “not a

good communicator” and that

she needs to “consider her priorities” effective

documentation?

Questions …


Unhappy with her performance review and

feeling that her supervisor is targeting her, Sally starts claiming that her supervisor is

causing her stress and anxiety. She gets a

note from her doctor saying she has work-induced stress and needs an additional 4-

week LOA. Her supervisor is adamant that

she is making this up, but she has a proper Certification of Health Care Provider,

confirming that she suffers from a serious

health condition, so she is granted the time off. She returns without restrictions, but still

on her reduced schedule. Sally’s supervisor

decides to write her up for insubordination when she talks back to him after he says,

“Did you enjoy your little vacation?”

She claims it is retaliation and

threatens to call her attorney.

Sally also goes to HR and

insists that she needs to be

transferred to another

supervisor as an

accommodation for her disability. In support of this,

Sally presents a doctor’s note

that says, “Sally suffers from a

disabling condition that is

exacerbated by interaction

with her current supervisor.”

Continued …

1. Can she be written up for her disrespectful behavior?

2. Is the employer required to transfer Sally as an accommodation?

3. Is the employer required to do an investigation?

Questions …


Case Study No. 2

David has been a school nurse for 2 years.

He requires surgery for a non-work-related injury. After 6 weeks off of work, he returns

with temporary restrictions on lifting, which

the school determines it can accommodate, based on past practice and a review of the

essential functions of the position. He works

fine within his restrictions for the first few days, but then he re-injures himself lifting a

student by himself, rather than waiting for

help from co-workers. David’s supervisor concludes that the restrictions are not

sufficient to protect David’s and student’s

safety. His supervisor sends him home and says he cannot return to work until all the

restrictions have been lifted.

Case Study No. 2

1. Was the school right to bring him back to his former job with the lifting restrictions?

2. Was David’s supervisor right to send him home and tell him not to come back until the restrictions are removed?

Questions …

Case Study No. 2

David’s doctor, concerned about the re-

injury, refuses to remove the restrictions, and in fact, states that David is not to do

any lifting, bending or twisting at all.

Otherwise, he is cleared to return to work on “light duty,” after a four-week LOA

(which was properly designated as

FMLA/CFRA). When he provides this information to HR, they decide to assign

him to an administrative desk filling out

student paperwork until he can return to his regular assignment. Months go by, and

the rest of the staff complains that they

are overloaded, so the school hires a new nurse to fill David’s position and to lighten

the load for the other employees.


Case Study No. 2

David goes to HR and complains

that he is unhappy at his desk

job and demands that he be returned to his former duties,

which he insists he can do

without any lifting. The HR

manager tells him to get the

proper paperwork, but she does

not document their conversation or provide David with any forms.

She also doesn’t think they need

another nurse at the school right

now, since they seem to be fully

staffed with the recent hire.

Continued …

Case Study No. 2

1. Is it proper for the school to assign

David to a desk job until his lifting and bending restrictions are

lifted?

2. Should HR have documented the

terms of the light duty accommodation?

3. Should the HR manager have

documented her conversation

with David? Should she have called his doctor to ask about the

lifting restriction?

4. Should the school have hired a

new nurse while David was on light duty?

Questions …

Case Study No. 2

Upon the advice of the District’s attorney, HR decides to perform a job function analysis to determine whether lifting is an essential function of the nurse job. HR hires a third party company to come in and perform the analysis, which concludes that although patient lifting is a function of being a nurse, it is not an essential

function because there is other staff available who can assist with the lifting.


Case Study No. 2

Despite this, the District does not want to return David to his regular nursing job because 1) he already reinjured himself once; and 2) they already have enough nurses. However, the implementation of a new e-charting system has reduced the amount of patient paperwork, so there is really no need to keep David working at the administrative desk.

Case Study No. 2

1. Is the job function analysis a

privileged document? Should it be placed in David’s

personnel file?

2. Are the school’s reasons for not

wanting to return David to his full-duty nursing position

legitimate, even though the JFA

says he can do the job with the restriction?

3. Is the District required to keep

David employed at the

administrative desk, even though he is not really needed

there any longer?

Questions …

Case Study No. 2

The District decides that it no longer needs David’s services

at the administrative desk but that returning him to his nursing position causes an

undue burden on the other employees and affects student safety. What are the

District’s options?


Case Study No. 2

1. Termination?

2. More leave?

3. Anything else?

Questions …

Case Study No. 2

The District notifies David that he is being terminated effective immediately due to inability to reasonably accommodate a disability. The District refuses David’s request for pre-termination “Skelly” meeting because this is not a disciplinary termination. The District later denies his request for a post-termination appeal hearing for the same reason. David sues, alleging that he has been discriminated against on the basis of a disability, that he has been retaliated against for taking a protected leave of absence, and that he has been denied due process.

Case Study No. 2

David also claims that the District failed to reasonably accommodate him and did not engage in the interactive process. His lawyer serves discovery requests seeking David’s personnel file, his medical file, the JFA, and all communications by District management about David, one of which contains a comment by his supervisor that David has become “slow and lazy” since his surgery. The supervisor meant to copy the District’s attorney on that email, but he forgot, so he immediately forwards it to the attorney.

Continued …


Case Study No. 2

1. Is there any merit to David’s claims?

2. If David convinces a jury he is right, what kinds of damages might he be entitled to?

3. What defense(s) does the District have for its actions?

4. What things should the District have done better or differently?

5. Is the District required to produce the email referring to David as “slow and lazy”?

Questions …

Katy A. Suttorp

Katy Suttorp is a partner in Burke’s Orange County office,

representing public sector clients in labor and employment law matters.

Ms. Suttorp has represented and counseled a wide range of employers, including school districts, community college districts, municipalities, special districts, and private entities, in numerous matters. These include disability accommodation and interactive process, employee discipline and due process, leaves

and benefits, state and federal wage and hour audits and disputes, wrongful termination, workplace investigations, Firefighters Procedural Bill of Rights Act/Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act, employee speech and privacy, workplace violence, pre-employment and privacy issues, including drug and alcohol testing, Affordable Care Act, HIPAA/California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, and CalPERS and CalSTRS audits and disputes. Ms. Suttorp has also drafted and revised a variety of board policies, administrative regulations, employee handbooks, personnel rules and policies, collective bargaining agreements, memoranda of

understanding, and employer-employee resolutions.

In addition, Ms. Suttorp provides advice and representation for a variety of labor matters, including acting as lead negotiator, representing agencies in proceedings before PERB, and providing workplace training addressing challenges in supervising represented employees. She also provides training and seminars on other particular areas of concern for public

employers, including interactive process and reasonable accommodation, discipline and due process, performance evaluations, investigations, and prevention of harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and abusive conduct.

During law school, Ms. Suttorp clerked at the U.C. Davis office of the Campus Counsel and served as a summer extern for the Honorable Gary A. Feess, a judge of the United States District

Court for the Central District of California. She also served as editor-in-chief of the environmental law and policy journal, Environs. Ms. Suttorp recently completed a two-year appointment to the Program Review Committee for the American Inns of Court.

Upcoming Presentations

Health Insurance Opt-Outs After the Affordable Care Act and Flores v. City of San Gabriel Decision, County Counsels’ Association of California, Employment Law Fall 2016 Study Section Conference, November 2016

Choose Your Own Disability Adventure, CALPELRA Annual Training Conference, Monterey, CA, November 2016

Partner State Bar Number 228262

Orange County Office 1851 East First Street

Suite 1550 Santa Ana, CA 92705-4067

direct: 949.265.3403 main: 949.863.3363

fax: 949.863.3350 [email protected]

PRACTICE GROUPS

Labor & Employment Law

Education Law

Public Law

EDUCATION

J.D., University of California, Davis, 2003

B.A., Environmental Sciences, University of California,

Berkeley, 1998

ADMISSIONS

State Bar of California, 2003

United States District Court for the Central District of

California, 2005

Page 2

Upcoming Presentations (Continued)

Navigating Through the Fog of Fit for Duty Evaluations, CJPIA Risk Management Educational Forum, Indian Wells, October 2016

Eye on the Doppler: Managing Your Medical Clinic, CJPIA Risk Management Educational Forum, Indian Wells, October 2016

Tracking the Storm Chasers: Overseeing Volunteers, CJPIA Risk Management Educational Forum, Indian Wells, October 2016

Exploring the Depths of Disability Discrimination, Association of California School Administrators Personnel Institute, October 2016

Past Presentations

Preventing Harassment, Discrimination, and Retaliation in the Workplace, Client Presentation, September 2016

Power of the Pen: Creating Effective Documentation, Client Presentation, September 2016

Fitness for Duty Evaluations, CJPIA Workers’ Compensation

Symposium, La Palma, August 2016

The ADA, FEHA, and the Interactive Process: It’s More Than It Appears, Council of Self-Insurance Public Agencies, General Meeting, June 2016

Essentials of Workplace Investigations, Southern California Public Labor Relations Council, May 2016

Challenges of Supervising a Unionized Workforce, Client Presentation, April 2016

Preventing Workplace Harassment, Discrimination, Retaliation and Abusive Conduct, Client Presentation, December 2015 and

January 2016

Staff Training Requirements for Bilingual and English as a Second Language (ESL) Classrooms, National Business Institute, English Language Learner Law Seminar, December 2015

Preventing Workplace Harassment, Discrimination, Retaliation, and Abusive Conduct, Client Presentation, November 2015

Tap Dancing at Club Obi-Wan: Choreographing the Interactive Process, California Public Employers Labor Relations Association Annual Training Conference, October 2015

Diving in the Deep End of Disability Discrimination, Association of California School Administrators Personnel Institute, October

2015 Effective Return to Work Programs and the Interactive Process, California Worker’s Compensation & Risk Conference & Expo, September 2015

Page 3

Past Presentations (continued)

Diving in the Deep End of Disability Discrimination, Los Angeles County Office of Education, Employment Practice Liability Workshop, May 2015 HR Boot Camp: Client Presentation, April 2015 Employee Handbook Update 2015, Client Presentation, April 2015 Preventing Workplace Harassment, Discrimination, Retaliation and Abusive Conduct: Client Presentation, December 2014

Preventing Workplace Harassment, Discrimination, and Retaliation in the Legal Profession, September 2014 They’re Represented…Now What?!, Client Presentation, Ap ril 2014 Solving the Performance Evaluation Puzzle, Client Presentation, February 2013

Disability Training: Unraveling the Loop, Client Presentation, February 2012 Publications Curiouser and Curiouser: Expansion of the Duty to Reasonably Accommodate Disability, Employment Law Update, April 2016 Clear as Mud: California Wage and Hour Laws in the Public Sector, The Authority, CJPIA, April 2016 Body Piercings and Tattoos in the Workplace: Can Employers Place Limits on Them?, Carl Warren Connects; Carl Warren, December 2015 Pocket Guide to Disability Discrimination in the California Workplace, CPER, October 2015 Dress and Grooming Standards for California Public Employers…It’s a Bit More Complicated than You Might Expect ,

The Authority, CJPIA, August 2015 Legal Trends, Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP, 2008-2015 Significant Changes to the FEHA: Are You Prepared for 2015? , CALPELRA Alert, December 2014

Page 4

Publications (continued) Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014: What Does It Mean for Our Agency? The Authority, CJPIA, November 2014 SB 1021: More Changes Required for Retired Annuitant Contracts, Employment Law Update, July 2012 Pocket Guide to Disability Discrimination in the California Workplace (CPER, November 2011)

Documents

ACSA Personnel Institute - Schedschd.ws/hosted_files/2016personnelinstitute/6c/ACSA 2016... · ACSA Personnel Institute ... the workplace by determining what reasonable ... • Effective