Civil rights: discrimination: enforcement.
The legislative discussions emphasized the need for local governments to play an active role in addressing discrimination. SB 491 aims to allow for a more streamlined approach to handling workplace discrimination complaints, potentially reducing delays and increasing the responsiveness of government entities to these issues. If the DFEH advisory group, established under the bill, concludes that local enforcement is feasible, it would pave the way for future legislative efforts to empower local governments in this regard.
Senate Bill 491, also known as the Employment Anti-Discrimination Act of 2017, amends Section 12993 of the Government Code to enhance the enforcement of civil rights laws related to workplace discrimination in California. The bill allows local government entities to refer individuals alleging discrimination to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) and to provide them with relevant information and resources. The goal is to improve the enforcement of discrimination laws due to increasing claims and heavy investigation workloads faced by the DFEH, made more challenging by federal budget cuts to civil rights enforcement.
The sentiment surrounding SB 491 appears generally positive among proponents who view it as a necessary measure to combat workplace discrimination effectively. Supporters argue that localizing some enforcement responsibilities can make the process more accessible for individuals facing discrimination. However, there are concerns from certain groups about the adequacy of local resources and whether local entities can effectively handle these additional responsibilities while ensuring justice and compliance with civil rights laws.
Key points of contention have arisen regarding the capacity of local governments to enforce antidiscrimination laws effectively. Critics question whether sufficient resources and training will be made available to local entities, fearing that this might lead to inconsistent enforcement and under-resourced responses to complex discrimination cases. The potential for differing standards between local jurisdictions could also undermine the uniformity of protections afforded under state law.