Fair Employment and Housing Act

Fair Employment and Housing Act
Short title	Fair Employment and Housing Act
Enacted by	California State Legislature
Related legislation	Civil Rights Act of 1964, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

Fair Employment and Housing Act is a comprehensive California law that protects employees and applicants from discrimination in the workplace, as well as tenants and homebuyers from housing discrimination. The law is enforced by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), which is responsible for investigating complaints and taking enforcement action against violators, often in collaboration with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Fair Employment and Housing Act is similar to other anti-discrimination laws, such as the New York State Human Rights Law and the Massachusetts Fair Employment Practices Law, which also prohibit discrimination in employment and housing. The law has been influenced by landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions, including Griggs v. Duke Power Co. and Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson.

Introduction

The Fair Employment and Housing Act is a critical component of California's anti-discrimination framework, which includes other laws such as the California Labor Code and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. The law prohibits discrimination in employment and housing based on protected characteristics, including race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, age, disability, sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation, as defined by the California Supreme Court in cases such as In re Marriage Cases and Smith v. Knoll. The law applies to employers with five or more employees, as well as to housing providers, including real estate agents, property managers, and landlords, who are subject to the regulations of the California Department of Real Estate and the California Department of Housing and Community Development. The Fair Employment and Housing Act has been recognized as a model for other states, including New York, Massachusetts, and Washington, which have enacted similar laws to protect employees and tenants from discrimination.

History

The Fair Employment and Housing Act was enacted in 1959, with the goal of eliminating discrimination in employment and housing, as advocated by civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks. The law was amended in 1963 to include protections against discrimination based on sex and marital status, following the lead of the U.S. Congress, which had passed the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In 1972, the law was amended again to include protections against discrimination based on disability, as defined by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The law has undergone several other amendments and updates over the years, including the addition of protections against discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, as recognized by the California Supreme Court in cases such as In re Marriage Cases and Smith v. Knoll. The Fair Employment and Housing Act has been influenced by federal laws, including the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, as well as by the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, including Griswold v. Connecticut and Roe v. Wade.

Prohibited Practices

The Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits a wide range of discriminatory practices in employment and housing, including hiring and firing decisions, promotions and demotions, wages and benefits, and terms and conditions of employment, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board. The law also prohibits harassment and retaliation against employees and applicants who complain about discrimination or participate in the investigation or prosecution of a discrimination complaint, as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in cases such as Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth. In housing, the law prohibits discriminatory practices such as steering and redlining, as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Reserve System. The Fair Employment and Housing Act also prohibits land use decisions that have a disparate impact on protected groups, as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in cases such as Arlington County Board v. Richards and Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc..

Enforcement Mechanisms

The Fair Employment and Housing Act is enforced by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), which is responsible for investigating complaints and taking enforcement action against violators, often in collaboration with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The DFEH has the authority to conduct investigations and hearings, and to issue findings and orders that require employers and housing providers to take corrective action, as defined by the California Code of Civil Procedure and the California Government Code. The law also provides for private lawsuits by individuals who have been subjected to discrimination, as recognized by the California Supreme Court in cases such as Rojo v. Kliger and Williams v. Chino Valley Independent Fire District. The Fair Employment and Housing Act has been enforced in cases involving prominent companies, including Google, Facebook, and Uber, as well as in cases involving government agencies, including the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the Los Angeles Police Department.

Notable Cases

There have been several notable cases involving the Fair Employment and Housing Act, including Diaz v. Eagle Lions Industries, which established the principle that employers must provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Another notable case is Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., which established the principle that harassment can be a form of discrimination, as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in cases such as Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth. The Fair Employment and Housing Act has also been applied in cases involving same-sex marriage and transgender rights, including In re Marriage Cases and Smith v. Knoll, as well as in cases involving age discrimination, including Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. and Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory. The law has been recognized as a model for other states, including New York, Massachusetts, and Washington, which have enacted similar laws to protect employees and tenants from discrimination.

Amendments and Updates

The Fair Employment and Housing Act has undergone several amendments and updates over the years, including the addition of protections against discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation, as recognized by the California Supreme Court in cases such as In re Marriage Cases and Smith v. Knoll. The law has also been amended to include protections against genetic discrimination and family care leave, as defined by the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 and the California Family Rights Act. In 2019, the law was amended to include protections against hair discrimination, as recognized by the California Legislature and the U.S. Congress. The Fair Employment and Housing Act continues to evolve to address emerging issues and to provide greater protections for employees and tenants, as advocated by civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The law has been influenced by federal laws, including the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 and the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, as well as by the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, including United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges.

Category:California law