California Civil Rights Department
The California Civil Rights Department, formerly known as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, is an agency of California state government charged with the protection of residents from employment, housing and public accommodation discrimination, and hate violence. It is the largest state civil rights agency in the United States. It also provides representation to the victims of hate crimes. CRD has a director who is appointed by the governor of California and maintains a total of five offices and five educational clinics throughout the state. Today, it is considered part of the California Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency. When the California Housing and Homelessness Agency is formed in 2026, the CRD will be transferred to it.
Kevin Kish, a noted civil rights attorney, was appointed by Governor Jerry Brown on December 29, 2014, to be director of California's Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the largest state civil rights agency in the nation. The position of Director for the DFEH was made vacant following the abrupt resignation of the former director Phyllis W. Cheng.
Mission
The mission of the, is to protect Californian's from employment, housing and public accommodation discrimination, and hate violence.The Department enforces California state laws that prohibit harassment, discrimination, retaliation employment, housing, and public accommodations that provide for pregnancy leave, family, and medical. The D.F.E.H also accepts, investigates, mediates and prosecutes complaints alleging hate violence or threats of hate violence.
History
In 1959, California passed its first state-wide protections against workplace discrimination and created the Fair Employment Practices Commission to implement them. In 1980, the Fair Employment and Housing Act was formed, which consolidated both the 1959 Fair Employment Practices Act and the 1963 Rumford Fair Housing Act, and converted the Fair Employment Practices Commission to a department-level agency, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, to enforce that law. In July 2022, DFEH was renamed the Civil Rights Department to more accurately reflect its powers and duties.Statutes enforced
The CRD enforces the following California civil rights law:- .
- .
- .
- .
In housing, the Act provides protection from harassment and discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, or genetic information.
The FEHA also bars retaliation against any person who has filed a complaint with the department, participated in a department investigation or opposed any activity prohibited by the Act.
Under the FEHA, the department's jurisdiction extends to individuals, private or public entities, housing providers, and business establishments within the State of California. The FEHA's prohibitions against employment discrimination apply to employers with five or more employees. The prohibition against workplace harassment applies to employers with one or more employees.
Within the FEHA, the California Family Rights Acts allows an employee who has worked for at least 12 months, accrued a minimum of 1,250 hours during the preceding 12 months, and is employed at a worksite with 50 or more employees within 75 miles to take up to 12 work-weeks of protected leave. & An eligible employee may take CFRA leave for his or her own serious health condition; to care for a parent, dependent child, or spouse with a serious health condition; or for care and bonding in connection with the birth, adoption, or placement of a child for foster care. An employer is required under the CFRA to reinstate the employee to the same or a comparable position upon the termination of the CFRA leave. Additionally, the CFRA expressly prohibits an employer from refusing to hire, discharging, suspending, or discriminating in any manner against an employee because the employee has requested CFRA leave, or has given information or testimony about his or her own or another employee's CFRA leave.
Government Code section 12948 incorporates into the FEHA the Unruh Civil Rights Act, the Ralph Civil Rights Act, and the Disabled Persons Act. The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides that:
All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, or sexual orientation are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.
The Ralph Civil Rights Act prohibits violence or threats of violence because of an individual's actual or perceived of violence sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation or position in a labor dispute. California's Disabled Persons Act entitles all individuals with disabilities full and equal access to all places of public accommodation, amusement, or resort; medical facilities; common carriers, airplanes, motor vehicles, railroad trains, motorbuses, streetcars, boats, or any other public conveyances; private schools, hotels, lodging places, and other places to which the general public is invited.
FEHA history and development
On April 16, 1959, Governor Edmund G. “Pat” Brown, Sr., signed the Fair Employment Practices Act, which took effect on September 18, 1959. The FEPA prohibited discrimination in employment on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, and ancestry. The Act's jurisdiction covered employers of 5 or more persons, labor organizations, employment agencies, and any person aiding or abetting the forbidden actions.In 1963 the Legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act, prohibiting housing discrimination in all rental properties of four or more units on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin and ancestry.
In 1980, Governor Jerry Brown, and the Legislature reorganized civil rights enforcement. The FEPA and the Rumford Fair Housing Act were combined and renamed the Fair Employment and Housing Act, to protect Californians from both employment and housing discrimination.
The FEHA predates and provides broader protections than its federal counterparts, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1968 Fair Housing Act. Over the years, the FEHA has redressed civil rights violations faced by hundreds of thousands of Californians. Numerous decisions from the trial courts to the United States Supreme Court have affirmed the broad reach of the FEHA. Because of the Act, a vast number of employers and housing providers have changed their business practices to create a more level playing field for all Californians where they live and work.
Under the FEHA, the DFEH receives, investigates, mediates, conciliates, and prosecutes discrimination complaints on behalf of individuals and groups or classes of aggrieved persons. The Department adopts, promulgates, amends, and rescinds procedural rules and regulations to carry out its investigation, prosecution, and dispute resolution functions and duties. Additionally, the Department investigates, approves, certifies, decertifies, monitors, and enforces state contractors’ compliance with California's nondiscrimination laws.
Until December 31, 2012, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission adjudicated FEHA claims and promulgated regulations interpreting substantive rights under the FEHA. The Fair Employment and Housing Council, which replaces the separate Commission, exists within the department, and promulgates regulations interpreting substantive rights under the FEHA.
In recent years, the CRD has involved itself in tech industry affairs at times. In 2021, the agency reportedly began a probe into Google over allegations that the company has unfairly discriminated against Black female workers.
Senate Bill 1038
Governor Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown, Jr., signed into law Senate Bill 1038 on June 27, 2012. SB 1038 transformed the role of the CRD and the enforcement of the FEHA. Effective January 1, 2013, among other changes, the bill amends the FEHA to: eliminate the Fair Employment and Housing Commission and replace it with a Fair Employment and Housing Council within the department; transfer the commission's regulatory function to the Department's Council; and end administrative adjudication of FEHA claims.SB 1038 specifically authorizes the CRD to:
- File cases directly in state or federal court. ; 12965, subd. ; 12981, subd.
- Collect attorney fees and costs when the CRD is the prevailing party in FEHA litigation.
- Prior to filing a civil action, require all parties to participate in mandatory dispute resolution in the CRD internal Dispute Resolution Division, free of charge to the parties. ; 12981, subd.
Authority
The CRD is the State agency responsible for enforcing California's civil rights laws and is the largest state civil rights agency in the nation. CRD has five offices located in Sacramento, Fremont, Fresno, Bakersfield, and Los Angeles. The Sacramento office is designated as "headquarters" and is where the CRD executive team works.Divisions:
- Enforcement
- Dispute Resolution
- Legal
- Administrative
CRD Clinical Programs:
- DFEH-UC Irvine School of Law Civil Rights Clinic.
- DFEH-UCD Davis School of Law Employment Discrimination Program.
- DFEH-CSU Bakersfield Graduate School Civil Rights Clinic.
- DFEH-College of the Canyons Civil Rights Clinic.
- DFEH-Rio Hondo College Housing Rights Clinic.
- DFEH Civil Rights Graduate Fellowships.
- Effective October 7, 2011.
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, §§ 10000–10066.
If an individual or organization fails to comply with a subpoena, interrogatory, request for production, or examination under oath by refusing to respond fully or providing only objections, the CRD may file a petition with a superior court for an order compelling compliance with the discovery, naming the individual or organization that failed to comply as the respondent. The period of time within which the department may bring a civil action to prosecute a violator is extended by the length of time between the filing of the petition and the filing by the CRD of a certified statement indicating the respondent's compliance with the court's order compelling a response.
In the case of failure to eliminate an unlawful practice through conference, conciliation, mediation, or persuasion, the CRD may bring a civil action in the name of the department on behalf of the person claiming to be aggrieved. ; 12981, subd. Prior to filing a civil action, the department must require all parties to participate in mandatory dispute resolution in the CRD's internal Dispute Resolution Division, free of charge to the parties, in an effort to resolve the dispute without litigation. Dispute resolution is mandatory for all cause cases for which the CRD will file a civil action. Mandatory dispute resolution is conducted behind a firewall by the CRD's attorney mediators.
In civil actions alleging employment or housing discrimination, the court, in its discretion, may award to the prevailing party, including the CRD, reasonable attorney's fees and costs, including expert witness fees.
Right to sue
In order to file a discrimination lawsuit in the state of California, a right to sue notice must be obtained from the agency. The lawsuit must be filed in a state court within one year from receipt of the notice. Right to sue notices are issued when the CRD does not investigate the complaint.Any person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful employment, public accommodation, or housing practice may file a verified complaint for investigation with the CRD. Filing an administrative complaint with the CRD within one year of an alleged unlawful practice, and receipt of a right-to-sue, are prerequisites to filing a private action for employment discrimination under the FEHA.
Notable cases
''Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Law School Admission Council, Inc.''
In this case, the CRD filed suit to halt ongoing harm to individuals with disabilities who sought to enter the legal profession. DFEH alleged that the Law School Admission Council which administers the Law School Admission Test subjected test takers who seek accommodations to onerous documentation requirements, denied requests for reasonable accommodations, and provided different and less desirable score reports to test takers who received the accommodation of additional test time.The complaint arose from a two-year government investigation by DFEH which began in January 2010. Early in the investigation, Phyllis W. Cheng, DFEH Director, personally issued a Director's complaint alleging that LSAC denied reasonable accommodations to prospective test takers with disabilities. After the Director's complaint, the DFEH filed suit and then litigated the case in federal court in San Francisco. The United States Department of Justice intervened in the suit which expanded the scope of the case and allowed for nationwide recovery.
The largest and only national DFEH case to date, the case was resolved by a settlement agreement which included an $8.73 million payment, of which $6.73 million were equally distributed to individuals nationwide who applied for testing accommodations on the LSAT from January 1, 2009, through May 20, 2014. The settlement was the product of a successful collaboration between state and federal agencies and the private bar and was submitted to the court for approval on May 20, 2014.
On May 29, 2014, United States District Court Judge Edward M. Chen entered a Permanent Injunction forever banning LSAC from annotating or "flagging" the LSAT scores of test takers who took the examination with the accommodation of additional test time. In the past, LSAC had reported the scores of those test takers and identified that the test taker was an individual with a disability, that the test had been taken under non standard conditions and that the test scores had to be viewed with great sensitivity. In addition the Judge today gave court approval to the 61-page Consent Decree with extensive provisions and revisions to LSAC's practices regarding testing accommodations and which provides for $8.73 million in monetary relief.