<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d11093232\x26blogName\x3dAB+1825+Sex+Harassment+Trainer\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://ab1825.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://ab1825.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-5676514328722923481', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

AB 1825 Sex Harassment Trainer

A free resource for California employers about the sexual harassment training law (AB 1825).

Who's qualified to do AB 1825 training?

AB 1825 requires training by instructors with "knowledge" and "expertise." So, can an HR generalist or company manager provide the training?

We may get some answers when the official regulations are released next year. However, until then, let me note one case where a company had a problem because of who they had do their training.

In Cadena v Pacesetter Corporation (10th Cir. 2000), a federal Court found a company (Pacesetter) liable for sexual harassment, in part because the company’s sexual harassment trainer lacked expertise about certain issues in sexual harassment law.

The Court ruled that the inadequate knowledge of the company’s sexual harassment trainer (who was a company telemarketing manager named Ann Humphrey) was evidence that the company didn’t care about the problem of sexual harassment.

The Court wrote: “Based on Humphrey's admitted ignorance about sexual harassment, a jury could reasonably infer that Pacesetter failed to make good faith efforts to adequately educate its employees about its non-discrimination policy and Title VII.”
« Home | Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »