Topic: AB 1825 - California Sexual Harassment Training

With 2009 coming to a close, many employers are scrambling to make sure they comply with California’s strict harassment training law, AB 1825.

I don’t know about you, but every time I read about a politician getting caught up in another sex scandal - former New York Governor Eliott Spitzer; former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick; South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford (the list could go on and on) - my jaw drops. But it’s dropped so many times, it’s almost cliché. I wonder if these guys will ever “get it” and learn to keep their pants on, and recognize that there’s no such thing as a secret when you’re a high profile politician or business leader.

But these sex scandals have a way of sticking around and recycling like a bad smell - and nobody ever seems to learn.

2009 is a sexual harassment prevention “re-train” year for most California employers. The state’s strict sexual harassment training law, AB 1825, requires any organization that does business in California, and that has more than 50 employees, to provide 2 hours of sexual harassment training to all California supervisors, every 2 years.

Now is the time to take a close look at your sexual harassment training programs. Far too many training programs are non-compliant and actually create legal risk.

Watershed moments in the world of civil rights are exciting. They tend to emerge slowly, and by the time they actually hit, the overwhelming collective response is, “it’s about time.”

Now it’s time for another watershed moment in the civil rights arena - and my prediction is that the focus will be on sexual orientation and gender identity. It’s a shift that will touch every employer across the nation.

Just last week, Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law The Safe Place To Learn Act, also known as AB 394. Even though this California law is limited in scope and application to the public school sector, employers across the country should sit up and take note. The outpour of public reaction to AB 394 paints a dramatic picture of the diametrically opposed, and passionate viewpoints that people (i.e. your employees) have about sexual orientation and gender identity.

So let’s start with the basics.  What’s AB 394 all about?

Supporters of the new law say that it’s designed to protect students in public schools, including those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender, from harassment and bullying at school. The new law requires anti-harassment training for students, parents, and teachers.

It’s been exactly one week since the AB 1825 sexual harassment training regs became effective. Any training done after August 17, 2007, must align with strict and detailed requirements.

I know many of you are taking a careful look at your sexual harassment training programs and asking tough questions about compliance.

Last week, I blogged about the 2 hour timing rule. This week, I want to help readers tackle one of the required forms of interactivity for online sexual harassment training programs – that supervisors be able to submit questions during e-learning, and have those questions responded to within 48 business hours.

In three short days, AB 1825’s sexual harassment training regulations are effective. That means any training done after August 17, whether live or online, must comply not only with the text of AB 1825, but also it’s detailed and demanding regulations.

The regulations place a particularly high onus on e-learning. The most hotly debated requirement? That employers be able to demonstrate their sexual harassment training programs take supervisors “no less than two hours to complete.”

In other words, you need to police the time.

Today, July 18, 2007, The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) approved final regulations for California’s mandatory harassment training law, AB 1825. Employers have 30 days to ensure that their training programs comply with the new rules.

The AB 1825 regulations have created groundbreaking, stringent requirements for all forms of harassment training, especially e-learning. They are impacting employers not just in California, but across the country.

Today, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission met in San Francisco and adopted revised AB 1825 regulations which can be found at: http://www.fehc.ca.gov/act/harass.asp.

Nothing has changed since the last regulations were circulated for public comment in late March.  (You can read about what drove the last round of modifications in my March 27 post.)

The regs now go to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for approval.

Stay tuned for more information on a potential effective date.

On Tuesday, March 27, California’s Fair Employment ’ Housing Commission (FEHC) met to adopt revisions to its AB 1825 regulations. These revisions were driven by the public commentary that followed the Commission’s February 27, 2007 version of the regs, which were designed to accommodate change requests from California’s Office of Administrative Law (OAL).

The OAL’s sole concern is the need for more clarity about who is actually qualified to create and/or present sexual harassment training programs, whether live or online.

In other words, who is a qualified expert under AB 1825?