Job Bias: Court Considers Marital Status Discrimination Claim; Avoiding Problems

In her first year as an Orange County deputy district attorney, Victoria Chen dated, and later married, Devallis Rutledge, a high-level management attorney in the district attorney’s office. After working there many years, Chen sued the county, arguing that she was discriminated against because of her relationship with Rutledge, who she claimed was not in the district attorney’s good graces. We’ll tell you why a California Court of Appeal tossed out her lawsuit, and we’ll provide practical guidelines for avoiding marital status discrimination claims.

Join us this fall in San Francisco for the California Employment Law Update conference, a 3-day event that will teach you everything you need to know about new laws and regulations, and your compliance obligations, for the year ahead—it’s one-stop shopping at its best.

Employee Disappointed With Assignments

Chen alleged that throughout her career with the district attorney’s office, she received unfavorable assignments and was passed up for promotions. Once, she claimed, she was transferred to a juvenile court assignment, which she viewed as unfavorable, because she came to a Christmas party with Rutledge. And when Chen returned from an extended maternity and medical leave, she was reassigned to the North Court branch but wanted to work closer to home for child-care reasons.Chen claimed there was a perception in the office that she had dated Rutledge to “get ahead.” Also, a senior management attorney allegedly told her that some managers resented her relationship with Rutledge, and that she had put herself “behind the eight ball” by dating him.

Employee Sues

Chen eventually filed a lawsuit charging that she was discriminated against because of her marital status in violation of California’s anti-bias law.The county denied the charges and argued that Chen’s assignments were reasonable based on her seniority. And although Chen was unhappy that her North Court assignment was far from her home, most attorneys assigned to that court lived farther away than Chen. The county also pointed out that two judges complained about Chen’s performance and that she had a history of absenteeism and tardiness.

Employer Motivated By Politics, Not Marital Status

A California Court of Appeal rejected Chen’s discrimination claim. The court expressed doubt that Chen was treated unfavorably, and surmised, in light of her performance record, that she actually received some preferential assignments. And management’s alleged disapproval of Chen’s relationship with Rutledge had nothing to do with their marriage, according to the court. Any arguably adverse action against Chen was because she had a relationship, married or not, with a man allegedly on the “outs” with the people managing the district attorney’s office.

Practical Guidelines

It’s illegal under state law to grant or deny employment benefits based on an applicant’s or employee’s marital status—including marriage, nonmarriage, divorce, separation, widowhood or annulment. Here are some California Department of Fair Employment and Housing guidelines on practices that do and don’t violate the law:

 

1. Pre-employment practices. It’s generally illegal to ask an applicant to disclose their marital status as part of a pre-employment inquiry. However, you can ask whether they’ve ever used another name if your request is for legitimate business reasons such as to check the person’s past work record. Also, although you can ask an applicant whether their spouse currently works for you, you generally can’t base an employment decision on this information.

    

2. Employee selection. You can only base an employment decision on whether an applicant or employee has a spouse presently employed by you in these circumstances:

    

   • For business reasons of supervision, safety, security or morale, you can refuse to place one spouse under the other spouse’s direct supervision.

      

   • You can refuse to place both spouses in the same department, division or facility if the work involves potential conflicts of interest or other risks that are greater for married couples than other workers.

      

   • If co-workers marry, you have to make reasonable efforts to assign job duties to minimize problems of supervision, safety, security and morale.

    

3. Employment terms and conditions. You can’t use job responsibilities such as travel, entertainment or other non-office-hour duties to justify discriminating based on marital status. And you can’t require a married female applicant or employee to use her husband’s last name. Finally, an employee’s fringe benefits can’t be based on marital status, although there are some special rules regarding benefits for an employee’s spouse or dependents.