In City of Moorpark v. The Superior Court of Ventura County, the California Supreme Court ruled that employees who suffer discrimination based on a work-related disability can sue for disability discrimination, a violation of FEHA, and for common-law wrongful termination. Before this decision, employees who suffered discrimination based on a work-related injury could seek remedies only under the workers’ compensation system.1

Similarly, in Bagatti v. Department of Rehabilitation, a California Court of Appeal allowed a disabled employee to sue her employer under FEHA. The employee suffered an on-the-job injury after her employer refused to accommodate her disability. The employer argued that the employee could not file a lawsuit for physical injury because the employee was protected by workers’ compensation law.

The court disagreed. It ruled that because her physical injury claim could be related to the employer’s failure to accommodate her disability, which is an unfair employment practice under FEHA, she should have a trial to prove if her injury resulted from that failure.2 For more information, see Failure to Accommodate.

Cases such as these allow disabled employees to pursue significant additional financial remedies if they can show that their employers violated FEHA. Labor Code section 132(a) offers only a limited remedy. Violating the state’s anti-discrimination laws makes compensatory and punitive damages available.

Prohibitions of confidentiality clauses in severance and settlement agreements also include acts of workplace harassment or discrimination based on any characteristic protected under the Fair Employment and Housing Act. While employees cannot be prohibited from discussing underlying facts of the case, employers can still use clauses that prevent the disclosure of the amount paid to settle the claim.

1. City of Moorpark v. The Superior Court of Ventura County, 18 Cal. 4th 1143 (1998)