Monday, December 14, 2020
The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal recently held in
Derbonne v. State Police Commission, No. 2019 CA 1455 (October 14, 2020), that an employee whose duties require that he or she report violations of state law is not precluded from pursuing a claim for unlawful reprisal under Louisiana’s anti-reprisal or whistleblower statute, La. R.S. 23:967.
La. R.S. 23.967 prohibits an employer from taking “reprisal against an employee who in good faith, and after advising the employer of the violation of law: (1) [d]iscloses or threatens to disclose a workplace act or practice that is in violation of [Louisiana] law[;] (2) [p]rovides information to or testifies before any public body conducting an investigation, hearing, or inquiry into any violation of law[;] [or] (3) objects to or refuses to participate in an employment act or practice that is in violation of law.”
val demmings and chris stew stuart. fox news sunday at top of the hour. don t miss it. jillian: immigration, executive power, abortion rights, job discrimination against lgbtq workers, some of the issues the supreme court will confront in the election year docket. the term kicks off monday. garrett tenney has a preview. reporter: the court may add issues dealing with gun control, religious liberty about and the environment. no shortage of hot button items on this term. first big one is this week on tuesday and deals with civil rights protections for lgbtq whether employers can be sued for job discrimination if they fire an employee coming out as gay or changing their gender. the issue title vii, which is the big employment discrimination law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex applies to situations where a person is terminated because they changed their sex,
let s talk sexual misconduct first. you actually spoke to a gop lawmaker who is calling for a change that governs how congress deals with sexual harassment claims because they have very arcane rules when they talk about that. exactly. i spoke to bradley burn, a republican from alabama, his specialty in law, he practiced employment discrimination law, specifically sexual harassment over the past 20 years he s been advising companies how to comply with the current law. when i spoke to him, he said there s a big disconnect between congress and media companies and hollywood, essentially, deal with and follow the rules. it s like there s two worlds out there. and the american people have every right to expect these large institutions to follow the exact same rules that private businesses have to follow. the small to medium size businesses that he s consulted with. he said first of all for congress, we need to have mandatory sexual harassment
federal anti-discrimination law, both constitutional and statutory. the big difference and i think one of the reasons that there s been so much opposition from religious groups in houston is that the houston ordinance expressly includes sexual orientation and that probably has what s been the focus of their ire. federal anti-discrimination law and employment discrimination law does not include sexual orientation as a protected ground. many states, however, do. texas unfortunately there are a lot of states, a lot of cities that have ordinances like this already. from my understanding, houston is one of the biggest cities in america that does not yet this kind of ordinance. legally speaking are the people who want this ordinance to make it easier for folks who feel they have been discriminated against to find local help?