From San Francisco Chronicle, 12/02/03

Public workers win ruling on discrimination

State justices rule claims don't have to be settled internally

By Harriet Chiang

The California Supreme Court made it easier for public employees to sue for discrimination Monday, ruling that plaintiffs do not have to go through an internal grievance process before heading to court.

The ruling is a victory for a former employee for the city of Los Angeles who filed a lawsuit claiming he had been fired from his job as a storekeeper because he suffered from severe hypertension. The city argued that Steve Schifando, a city employee for 16 years, first had to file an administrative claim before he sued.

But by a 5-2 vote, the state Supreme Court ruled that city, county and state employees have the same right as private workers to go immediately to a state agency that processes discrimination claims before they go to court.
The decision was a setback for cities that were hoping to cut litigation costs by dealing with discrimination claims internally. Sixty-one cities, including Alameda, San Jose, Santa Clara and Sunnyvale, filed a brief in support of Los Angeles.

In its decision, the court said "municipal employees who claim they have suffered employment-related discrimination need not exhaust city charter internal remedies prior to filing a complaint."

Justice Ming Chin said in the majority opinion that the state's Department of Fair Employment and Housing was created by the Legislature specifically to investigate discrimination claims. In Schifando's case, he noted, Los Angeles was seeking both to investigate the discrimination charges and defend itself against them.

Justice Marvin Baxter dissented from the ruling, saying it will encourage public employees to skip local administrative processes and rush to court, where lawsuits are costly and can take years to get to trial.

Had Schifando gone through Los Angeles' grievance procedures, he and the city "might have settled this matter amicably and avoided costly and burdensome litigation altogether," Baxter wrote in an opinion joined by Justice Janice Rogers Brown.

The high court reversed both the trial court and a state appeals court, which had tossed out Schifando's lawsuit. The case now goes back to Los Angeles Superior Court for trial.

Schifando's attorney, Robert Ball of Beverly Hills, was ecstatic over the decision. "Had we lost this decision, government employees would be second-class citizens," compared with private employees, he said. He said internal grievance processes are cumbersome and often provide few
remedies.

Eric Moses, a spokesman for Los Angeles, noted that employees who go to court will still need to prove they were victims of discrimination.

Arlene Prater, a San Diego attorney who filed a brief on behalf of the 61 cities, said local agencies may now lose the chance to resolve disputes amicably before they become lawsuits. "Using the grievance process allows each side to see the other side's point of view."

Charlotte Fishman, a lawyer with Equal Rights Advocates in San Francisco, called the ruling a "wonderful, pro-employee decision."

Fishman, who has represented women who have sued the University of California after being denied tenure, said the internal grievance process is so cumbersome that it can take years for a case to be resolved. "They have these systems of procedure that you'd need a Ph.D to understand," she said.