Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Beyond California
On Sept. 30, 2004, California enacted a law that requires employers who operate in California and who employ 50 or more persons to provide all supervisory employees 2 hours of sexual harassment training every 2 years. Employers must complete the first round of training for supervisors by Jan. 1, 2006. After that date, new supervisors must be trained within 6 months of obtaining a supervisory position. Employers are scrambling to ensure that they have trained all California-based supervisors by year's end. This article describes why employers should not focus simply on training supervisors in California. Instead, employers should provide training:
- On all forms of unlawful workplace harassment, not just on sexual harassment;
- To all employees, not just to supervisors;
- To all employees, not just to those located in California.
We also examine the consequences of not providing harassment prevention training to all employees in all states. Specifically, employers who fail to provide harassment prevention training to all employees may:
- Expose themselves to punitive damages in employee lawsuits; and
- Lose their ability to raise a defense to harassment lawsuits.
Preventing Unlawful Harassment: Training Is a Must
No matter the state in which they are located, employers should provide training that addresses all forms of unlawful workplace harassment, not just sexual harassment. While the new California law requires employers to provide 2 hours of sexual harassment training to supervisors, the law also makes clear that this training requirement is intended to represent a “minimum threshold” and does not “relieve any employer from providing for longer, more frequent, or more elaborate training and education regarding workplace harassment or other forms of unlawful discrimination … ”
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.