|
4702 In plaintiff's action for employment retaliation in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), her employer's perception that she could be a witness in a harassment claim of a co-worker, as well as in her own, satisfied the requirement that she engaged in a protected activity; pressure imposed on plaintiff in an effort to induce her to resign, including a warning that she would be transferred if she became involved in the co-worker's complaint, repeated threats of suspension, warnings that the way to avoid a huge black mark on her state service record would be to transfer before she was suspended, and manipulation of her work schedule to make her job less desirable, justified a jury's finding that her resignation resulted from a constructive discharge, which satisfied the adverse employment action requirement.CitationSTEELE v YOUTHFUL OFFENDER PAROLE BOARD (Bikini Contest) 162 CA4 1241 [See: GovC 12900 etseq; CCR II, 7287.8; Yanowitz v L'Oreal 36 C4 1028, T/AT 4/03; Turner v Anheuser-Busch 7 C4 1238, T/AT 8/94; Lujan v Minagar 124 CA4 1040, T/AT 1/05; Scott v PG&E 11 C4 454, T/AT 12/95]
|
|
