Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands modern under God invisible with liberty and justice for all.

Madam Clerk, would you please take a role?

Council Member Aguilar.

Present.

Councilmember Azevedo.

Present.

Councilmember Bolt.

Present.

Council Member Simon.

Present.

Vice Mayor Bavaros Walton.

Present.

Councilmember Bowen.

Present and Mayor Gonzalez.

Present.

And or the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.

California Penal Code Sections 403 or 415 are per se disruptive to a meeting and will not be tolerated.

Please see the City Council handbook and City Council meeting rules of decorum for more information.

Madam Clerk, your announcement, please.

If you would like to make a public comment regarding the special meeting agenda item, you can do so in person or via Zoom.

If you are present at the meeting, please complete a speaker card and submit it to the city clerk before the item is presented.

If you wish to participate in public comment via Zoom, please raise your hand when the item is called.

Okay, before jumping into our full training, which is our one item for this special meeting, uh, just checking to see if we've got any public commenters on the training that we are about to receive.

Mayor, we have not received any cards and there are no hands raised online.

Okay, so we will close public comment on this item and then proceed with our presentation.

I know city attorney, I think you are introducing this item.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

And good evening, uh, City Council.

I'd like to it's my pleasure to introduce Neha Shah.

She's a she's a senior of counsel at Redwood Public Law.

She has significant experience in a broad range of labor and employment matters with an emphasis on traditional labor relations, advice and counsel, and workplace investigations.

She's a frequent presenter and trainer and regularly speaks at conferences and seminars on public sector labor law, practices before PERB, harassment prevention, equity and inclusion, and human resources best practices.

I'll hand it over to Naha to commence with the uh training.

Thank you.

Thank you for the introduction, Rich, and nice to meet all of you.

Uh so today's training is being rendered in accordance with the California government code, uh 12950.

Um, as Rich uh shared my background, I want to provide a little bit more context.

Um, I started my career as a workplace investigator doing uh discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and Title IX investigations.

And since then, uh the focus of my practice has been um processing, discrimination, harassment, retaliation claims, both in civil proceedings, EEOC and the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which is now referred to as the Civil Rights Department.

Today's agenda is to we're going to help you identify what constitutes inappropriate behavior in the workplace and how that behavior can impact the people around you.

We're going to talk about how to create a safe and respectful workplace that is free from harassment.

We're going to help you understand your rights and responsibilities regarding discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and abusive conduct, and help you identify behaviors that might be considered inappropriate or unlawful.

We'll deeper dive into the nuances of gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation.

Our focus on abusive conduct is also pursuant to the government code, which requires that in California, we provide training specifically on abusive conduct.

So just for some housekeeping, this presentation will be about an hour long, and then we're gonna break out into groups to go over some hypothetical group exercises.

I'll ask that if you could please try and save your questions until the end of the presentation just for time's sake, and we will I'll take the temperature and about an hour to see if anyone needs to take a bio break.

But we'd like to, the requirement is two hours.

So I'd like to try and fit everything within the two hours.

All right, so I think in order to have a comprehensive discussion about discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and abusive conduct, it's really important to understand the context of where we're at today and how we got here.

In the past five years, social movements have significantly informed how labor laws have changed, and also what rights and responsibilities that employees and employers have.

For example, in 2017, the Me Too movement made significant contributions to both federal and state law, specifically sexual harassment related laws.

In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic changed the way that employees show up to work.

We moved to an entirely remote environment to now a hybrid environment, and employers are now experiencing an increase of surge and return to work requests, remote workplaces.

That became a well-known phrase because we learned through the pandemic that your workplace can be extended beyond the physical location of your employer.

There's been an increase in social media use as well between employers and their employees.

And as you've seen, the number of social media outlets have also increased.

And these communications are happening off hours as well, which begs the question of what is the workplace and how can what are other forms where discrimination, harassment, and retaliation can occur.

Other significant events you want you see on there, the murder of George Floyd in 2021, the uptick in violence against members of the Asian American and Asian communities because of COVID-19 misinformation.

Increasingly in the past couple years, there's been anti-LGBTQIA legislation.

And then the conflict in the Middle East has very much shown up in the workplace in the last two years.

Because of these things, it's been harder to disentangle work from personal life.

And so it's necessary to look at how they've shown up in the workplace.

And we'll go into more detail later in the presentation.

So elected officials in the workplace.

You all are not employees of the City of San Leandro, but you are elected officials, and so your obligations are slightly different than traditional supervisor employees.

Elected officials are still considered supervisors under FIHA, which means you're required to follow FIHA and not discriminate, harass, or retaliate against employees of the city of San Leandro.

Supervisor under FIHA is defined as any individual having the authority in the interest of the employer to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or the responsibility to direct them or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend that action.

If in connection with the foregoing, the exercise of that authority is not merely routine or clerical in nature, but requires the use of independent judgment.

It's also well established that elected officials are supervisors through case law.

There's a case, Bayata v city of Los Angeles, where the courts decided that elected officials are supervisors under FIHA because the city council generally has the authority to hire, fire, and issue direction to, at the minimum, the city manager.

FIHA doesn't define agent of the employer.

So we look to traditional principles of what defines an agent, and generally speaking, elected officials are considered agents of the employer under FIHA as well.

And this is important to understand because elected official conduct can expose the city to liability.

So supervisors and non-supervisors have different obligations under FIHA.

If the harasser is a supervisor, then different rules apply.

There's strict liability for the employer, irrelevant of whether the harassment culminates in a tangible action.

Employers are responsible for the acts of agents and supervisors.

For non-supervisory employees, the employer still can be responsible if the employee, if the supervisor or agent knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate corrective action.

So that means you and your capacity as elected officials, if you knew or should have known about conduct, you have an obligation to report it immediately and potentially take corrective action.

California law departs from federal standards in the sense of what if a tangible employment action is necessary.

Federal standards require it, whereas California doesn't.

And is everyone familiar with what a tangible employment action is?

No?

Okay, and go over the definition.

Okay.

Tangible employment action is a significant change in employment status.

So that would be like hiring, firing, or failing to promote somebody.

A tangible employment action requires an official active enterprise.

It's usually something that's documented through records, usually inflicts some sort of economic harm onto somebody.

And conversely, it's not tangible if it results only in an insignificant change, which California will still honor.

So unfulfilled threats are insufficient, but they can still lend themselves to a harassment claim.

In California, if an employee was not actually fired, but the supervisor took action to effectuate a termination, let's say, they could still that could still be considered an adverse employment action.

The only way to really avoid liability for unlawful harassment that results in tangible employment actions are to prevent them from happening.

So we're gonna go over the City of San Leandro's policies throughout the presentation, and that's part of the requirement of the government code to do that.

I won't read it for you here, but I will leave it on the screen to give you a moment to review.

Okay, we're gonna move on to discrimination.

So can anyone here define discrimination?

Yes.

Yep, plus, yep.

Decisions based on a person's protected category, which interferes with their equal opportunity, equal employment opportunities.

So the main laws that protect employees from discrimination include the California Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, which prohibits disqualifying any person from entering or pursuing a business, profession, vocation, or employment based on sex, race, creed, color, or national or ethnic origin.

Most people are familiar with Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the ADA, the American with Disabilities Act, and the Fair Employment and Housing Act, also known as FIA.

So when we talk about discrimination and avoiding discrimination, our goal is to ensure that employees and applicants are not treated unfavorably because of a protected characteristic.

Under Title VII, there are two types of discrimination.

There's disparate treatment and disparate impact.

Are any is anyone here familiar with the differences between the two or can share the definitions?

Okay.

Okay.

So disparate treatment is intentionally treating one person or group different from another.

So an example of that is a workplace that hires women for certain positions, like nursing or administrative assistance or a restaurant host.

That could be considered dispair treatment, or the practice of only hiring non-LGBTQIA plus executives in an organization.

Disparate impact, also known as unintentional discrimination, is applying a neutral rule that impacts one group adversely over another.

So an example of that would be the construction industry, um perhaps hiring more men than women because of physical abilities.

So when we discuss disparate impact, um it's also important to discuss the difference between equity and equality.

Um does anyone know the difference between equity and equality here.

That little poster comes in mind for people doesn't really work.

That's a great poster.

That's a good example.

Yes.

So I'm interrupting.

Can you get closer to the mic?

I'm having a heart night.

Sure, no problem.

You can actually need a whole thing.

Oh, okay.

A little bit.

All right.

Are there copies of slides?

Yes, they're in the packet on your um right in front of you.

There should be a packet for you.

Is that better?

Okay.

No problem.

Okay, so equality is the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities.

So in the workplace, this looks like having an EEO policy.

And equity means fairness and justice.

So the two terms are distinguishable because equality means providing the same, whereas equity means recognizing that everyone doesn't start from the same, um, everyone doesn't start from the same place.

And so it's an opportunity to adjust imbalances.

Um and this is generally an ongoing process that requires identification of the barriers and continue continuing change.

And one example of legislation which was created in direct response to discrimination against pregnant women or and mothers, is um lactation and pregnancy leave policies, and that's really to ensure equity in the workplace to ensure working mothers and lactating mothers um have an equal equal chance at succeeding in the workplace.

So before I go to the next slide, which is a discussion of the protected categories.

Um I'd like to hear from you all if you know what some of the protected categories are, and you can just shout them out.

Yes, sexual orientation.

That's right.

Anyone else?

Disability, yes.

Religion, is veteran one?

Veteran is one.

Does anybody know how many protected categories there are?

More than that.

22.

So these are just some of them.

What's not included on here is ancestry, which includes caste.

Um sex also includes breastfeeding, um, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions, religious creed, um, and citizenship status is a protected category under federal law.

Does anyone have an idea of what discrimination based on genetic information might look like?

So it might be not wanting to hire an employee who has a cancer predisposition out of concern of absenteeism.

What about um an example of disability discrimination?

The police departments do it all over the place with PTSD.

They don't want to hire a veteran who has PTSD and then put them out the public with a level.

So yes, that there's other, I think there are other things related there for police officers, but um, yes, mental health uh ailments that employers use as a reason not to hire employees can certainly be disability discrimination.

Um another example is not hiring someone because they're on the autism spectrum and they might need additional accommodations to do their job.

What about if they're in a wheelchair?

Yes, or if they're in a wheelchair, exactly.

Oh, how about age discrimination?

Does anyone know when that kicks in, when what age becomes protected?

40.

40 and 40 or older, exactly.

What about um caste?

I mentioned caste as a part of uh ancestry.

Um does anyone know what caste is when it's when someone's born into a certain part of if you're a blacksmith, you're if your parents were a blacksmith, you're like your parents are lawyers, you're lawyer, you know what some of the specifics but keep standing in that class of person.

It's like a social stratification.

Yes, that's that's what it is exactly.

So in history, some examples of what caste-based discrimination look like are the Jim Crow segregation, um, and Nazi treatment of uh Jewish people.

Um I think a lot of people also draw parallel to um castm in Hindu society in India, um, which is now illegal in India, but they had a more formal caste system there, which basically determined access to opportunities based on sort of what caste people were um born into.

It's estimated that caste affects hundreds of billions, sorry, millions of people globally.

Um so it is considered officially a part of Anchester and California and it is protected.

Okay, let's talk about discriminatory decision making.

So intentional discrimination is the most obvious, and that's what you are seeing on the screen.

Things like recruiting, hiring, but there are other things that can also be considered discrimination that are less obvious, like invitations to meetings, um, or withholding invitations to meetings, um, gatekeeping, how it's often referred to, um, you know, determining who gets a seat at the table, um, who can have visibility or increased visibility to certain individuals.

Really almost every decision related to employment can result in a claim of discrimination.

Um, so managers should scrutinize every single decision they make to ensure there's no discriminatory impact.

And going even further for unionized workforces, which I understand the city of San Leandro has a unionized workforce.

Um union activity is also considered protected.

And um, for cases at PERB, um that is also another area where um employers need to be aware um of that union leaders have enhanced rights with respect to advocating for um wages, hours, terms, and conditions of employment.

I think the bottom line is when it comes to thinking about discrimination, it's important that employees feel like they're treated uh equitably and fairly.

Um every employment decision does need to be motivated by a legitimate business related concern and have an identifiable relationship to the position in question.

So this is the City of San Leander's anti-discrimination harassment policy.

I won't read it out loud for you, but it is in front of you.

Um and as a requirement for the training to be compliant, you will need to go through AP 1000.

Um, but I I'll give you a moment just to review it here.

Okay, moving on to harassment.

Harassment is mistreatment based on or directed at membership in a protected category or involving unwelcome behavior that is sexual in nature.

The vast majority of claims are filed by women against men.

However, there has been an uptick in claims by men against women, and um we'll talk about why we think that might be the case.

There was a recent 2024 survey by Tulane University.

It was a multi-state survey called the hashtag me to 2024.

And in the survey, 42% of male respondents indicated that they had experienced sexual harassment or sexual assault in their lifetime.

This included verbal sexual harassment, cyber sexual harassment, and physically aggressive sexual harassment.

Experts believe that harassment of men hasn't increased, but it's just that resources have increased, and so more men are feeling comfortable reporting.

The primary sources of sexual harassment prevention law are the EEOC and the California Civil Rights Department.

Um harassment can also be on the basis of other protected categories beyond sex, so the other categories that we touched on earlier.

Um they can also be based on gender expression, identity, and sexual orientation.

So what what would it mean to be um what would it mean to harass someone on the basis of their sexual orientation?

Does anyone have an example?

Calling someone that they are a certain call, saying yes, using derogatory terms in regards to someone's orientation.

That's right.

Maybe an employee who identifies as transgender and recently had surgery, you know, making comments about their surgery.

That could be considered harassment.

So there are two types of harassment.

We're gonna go over that more in detail, but the first type involves a tangible employment action, formally known as quid pro quo, and the other is a hostile work environment.

So quid pro quo is the more obvious kind of sexual harassment.

That this for that, um, you hear it, uh I think this is the one that occurs mostly in movies that you see in movies where there will be a manager asking an employee to engage in some sort of uh sexual act in order to advance in the workplace.

It's most common example.

This is the easiest to spot and prove.

Um it can be very explicit, like you know, engage in physical action with me, and you will get the promotion that you want.

Um, the allegations against Harvey Weinstein, uh, if you recall that during the Me Too movement, those many of those were considered quid pro quo.

He was essentially asking there was an exchange for um, you know, spaces in the uh film industry.

Uh this can also, it's also possible to have reverse quid pro crow.

So this is when a person rejects sexual advances and then they're terminated, they receive an adverse performance review, um, they're getting you know less prestigious job assignments or their office is being moved somewhere, umdesirable.

And then we get to hostile work environment.

So in order to have a hostile work environment claim requires an unwelcome conduct that is sexual in nature or gender based, protected class based.

It has to be offensive, um, it has to be severe or pervasive, and it must create an intimidating and hostile work environment.

The vast majority of claims that I see as a workplace investigator tend to be hostile uh work environment claims.

Um severe generally means it has to be, it has to be very intense.

Uh that's what determines how bad the conduct is.

So, for example, um, a type of conduct that has been deemed to be severe is uh using the N-word against a black employee.

Um, that has been determined to be just a single act is severe enough to um be deemed harassment.

Um pervasive means the frequency of the conduct, so severe or pervasive.

Pervasive would mean um multiple actions that uh in totality create a hostile work environment.

Um does anyone remember the Anita Hill hearings?

Okay.

So based on what you just learned about sexual harassment, what type of sexual harassment do you think Anita Hill was experiencing?

Was it quid pro quo or hostile work environment?

Yes, that's right.

She was, as I recall, claiming, you know, she was there was lots of discussions of pornographic material, discussions of women's physical physicalities, sexual activities over uh extended period of time.

So when we think about hostile work environment and harassment, intent versus impact is important to discuss.

Whether when considering harassment, it's essential to broaden our perceptions to understanding that harassing behaviors are more egregious and harmful than um that are obvious.

People can engage in minor acts of harassment and not even consider it to be such.

Um it can start small.

Uh whether conduct qualifies as sexual harassment should be evaluated based on the perspective of the victim and not stereotype notions of acceptable behavior.

So there is a reasonableness analysis that goes into it, but overwhelmingly what the victim believes is important.

So what are some examples of minor acts that, if pervasive could be considered harassment?

Does anyone have any examples?

Exactly what you said before, where it's just constant.

Yeah, so let's think about a remote work environment.

Maybe having an inappropriate Zoom background or making comments about someone's background, what's in their background?

Maybe they're taking a call from their bedroom, making comments about their bedroom or what they're seeing in that person's bedroom.

Taking a Zoom call pantlass.

I think this came up more during the pandemic, but you know, a combination of those happening several times could be considered a hostile work environment.

Let's talk about microaggressions.

Is everyone familiar with microaggressions?

We see you're not, okay.

So microaggressions are everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their status.

This is in contrast to micro inequity, which reflects bias that can be indirect or negligently inflicted, but is demeaning to the recipient.

So an example of that is repeatedly calling someone by their wrong name or by their wrong pronouns.

So it's really exclusion and ostracizing.

So these are some examples of microaggressions.

Does anyone can anyone provide examples of other types of microaggressions?

These are more common, I think, right?

Yeah.

Okay.

Let's talk about harassment in the virtual workplace specifically.

So we gave some examples of what some incidents that combine could be a hostile work environment.

But why?

Why does a virtual workplace create challenges?

Boundaries is one big reason.

Um in a remote environment, especially if communication is constant through various mediums, whether it's email, phone, social media, LinkedIn.

It makes it harder to create the boundaries.

Unwelcome conduct can come in several forms, and you'll see an AP 1000.

It uh addresses all these different types of forms of harassment in more detail.

Can anyone give me an example of verbal harassment?

What might be an example of verbal harassment in the workplace?

It could be, yeah, combined with maybe a reference to protected class.

It could be on its own, it might be considered abusive conduct or bullying if there's no protected class implicated.

What about visual harassment?

That could be considered visual harassment.

It could also be considered maybe physical harassment, right?

Because you're using your finger to flip someone off.

That's what you meant, right?

Yeah, that could be considered physical as well, physical harassment.

It could be, it could be staring someone down.

It could also be playing something inappropriate for the workplace on your computer and someone sees it over your shoulder.

Um, yeah, those are all good examples.

So when we think of the expanded workplace as it relates to elected officials specifically, it's beyond just city hall, right?

You and your capacities as representatives of the city are attending JPA meetings and conferences off-site, your meeting with legislators in Sacramento.

Um, you know, attending you might be attending city meetings from home or a commission meetings from home, and all of those can be considered the workplace when you're acting in your official capacity.

Doesn't matter if it's within traditional work hours nine to five.

Um, the determining factor is whether there's some relation to the city.

Some of the things that uh investigators will look at when considering an expanded workplace beyond these, uh, this listed here is whether the person is getting a benefit from their employer when they're attending this event or acting in that capacity.

If there's any reimbursement or compensation related or rendered, if there are any written agreements between this person and uh the employer with respect to whatever uh it is that they're participating in.

Workplace romance is another big area where uh sexual harassment claims will often show up.

And you know, it's it's undeniable that people often meet their partners at in the workplace.

It just happens you're spending a lot of time with people, um, your colleagues.

Um, it happens.

The problem is is that when it goes south, um, you know, that can show up in the workplace, and also when there's a power differential.

So, you know, if a supervisor is dating their analyst, um, there's a power differential inherently in that relationship.

Um, you can also have other issues if the relationship is going well, like PDA in the workplace or um, you know, talking to your uh colleagues about your experience with your relationship.

Um, those PDA is public display of affection.

Oh yes.

Thanks for that uh for the question.

Um so it can create uncomfortable situations for colleagues.

I don't know, City of San Leandro, if they have a non-dating policy.

No, but it's generally frowned upon to date your coworkers, especially if there's a power difference.

Um let's talk about social media communication.

So sexual harassment can include unwanted phone calls, text messages, messages on social media, we've discussed to a council person or a non-council person.

The question is whether there's a nexus.

These are some common emojis that have may have sexual connotation associated with them, which is why I I've put them up on the screen.

Is everyone familiar with these emojis and the connotations?

Okay.

I'm not, but we don't need to get into it.

Okay, okay.

So when we think about harassment, just some general rules that the victim does not have to be of the opposite sex.

Uh, the offender or offended can be a supervisor, agent of the employer, supervisor in another area, a client, or a third party.

So it can be someone visiting, let's say, a city council meeting.

Um, the offended does not need to be the target of the conduct.

So it can be a third party who has observed the conduct and they have found it to be offensive.

They themselves could potentially then bring a claim for harassment.

And again, it can be verbal, visual, or physical conduct.

So, how common is sexual harassment in the workplace?

It remains commonplace with about 40% of working women saying that they're experiencing such treatment during their careers, ranging from sexist jokes to obscene comments directed towards them.

This particular study found.

Um, and and this is for reported sexual harassment in America, it doesn't account for across the world where advocacy or tools for reporting may not be as well developed.

So, in addition to sexual harassment cases, there are a variety of other claims that can attach listed here.

And so there's often um often sexual harassment is tied, we see it most frequently with wrongful termination claims, uh, discrimination, harassment, retaliation claims often go together as one.

Um it can result in workers' compensation is up there because if an employee is experiencing something in the workplace that's caused by the workplace, they then have the right to file for workers' compensation claims.

So we oftentimes will see that workers' compensation aspect attached to uh discrimination harassment, retaliation claims, um stalking, invasion of privacy, sometimes workplace violence.

Uh sometimes there's it's necessary to explore temporary restraining orders if there is some sort of violence in the workplace happening.

So why do people not complain?

Well, people, women in particular, as a commissioner of the ABA Commission on Women in the Profession states, women who are victims of sexual harassment may think I better be careful, I don't want to screw myself for the rest of my career.

If a woman made a claim of sexual harassment against her firm, it would be difficult for her to be hired at another firm.

And it is a real fear of retaliation, is generally attached to making a sexual harassment claim.

So California also requires specifically that employees be trained on sexual harassment, gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation.

So we're gonna cover that more in detail here.

Most people understand the definition of sexual orientation, which is a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders that they're attracted to.

Sexual orientations you're probably familiar with include gay, lesbian, straight, bisexual, pansexual, asexual.

For example, women who are attracted to men or men who are attracted to women are referred to as heterosexual or straight.

People who are attracted to the same gender, you will sometimes hear them refer to as gay or lesbian.

People who are attracted to both men and women, bisexual.

People who don't experience any sexual attraction for anyone often refer to themselves as asexual.

Does anyone know what pansexual is?

No.

Okay, pansexual are people whose attractions span across many different gender identities.

So it can be male, female, transgender, gender queer, um, or intersex.

So they may they refer to themselves as pansexual or queer.

So what is gender identity?

Gender identity is a person's internal, deeply held knowledge of their own gender.

For most people, their gender identity matches the sex they were assigned at birth, often referred to as cisgender.

For transgender people, their gender identity does not align with the sex they were assigned at birth.

For other people, their gender identity does not fit neatly into one of those two binary genders, so non-binary.

So gender identity is different from sexual orientation because it's about who you are and how you feel on the inside.

Um, in other words, it's the gender that you most identify with.

This is distinguished from gender expression, which is how a person publicly expresses or presents their uh gender identity, and it's typically through their mannerisms and how they dress.

So, what's an example of someone that might be harassed based on their gender expression?

It could be an employer firing an employee because they identified as male at birth, but now they use feminine pronouns, and perhaps they wear uh skirt suits to work.

Um, and then the employer takes an action against this person for how they are dressing or how they're expressing their gender that would not have been taken but for the fact they are now wearing skirt suits or using feminine pronouns.

I had a question when you think about behavior because that in itself may be uh to say someone is behaving a certain way, maybe discriminatory.

Someone is behaving as if they're gay, how do you behave gay?

And what you said is typically through appearances, way they dress and behave.

So is that why you asked it out?

No, I mean it's it's included.

Um, it could be um uh, you know, being critical of their mannerisms is also a behavior.

Um, if you know, if someone is being criticized, someone who's born male at birth is being criticized for um acting in a way that society deems to be overly feminine.

That could be um a form of harassment.

Oh, got it.

Yeah, okay.

So what is non-binary?

Um has any is anyone familiar with non-binary?

No.

Okay, yes, great.

Uh non-binary is an umbrella term for people with gender identities out of the conceptions of strictly either female or male.

So California is one of the first states to recognize non-binary as a gender.

Um, what's significant though is that many cultures have recognized non-binary uh for centuries.

So it has been around for quite some time.

Since 2019, people may use non-binary on their driver's license and birth certificates.

When I talked about other cultures recognizing it, you may have heard reference to two-spirit people.

For example, this is the Pacific Islander and Native American cultures and these cultures, a person who is non-binary or someone of both genders are celebrated as having special abilities.

So what is transgender?

A transgender person is people whose gender identity or gender expression do not match the gender they were assigned at birth.

Transgender people express their gender identity in different ways.

Some dress or express or have behavior or mannerisms to live in the gender that feels right to them.

This is considered a social transition.

Some people actually have surgery to change their physical bodies and take hormones, and this is considered medical transition.

And some just reject traditional notions of gender as divided between male and female.

This is significant because transitioning, a person transitioning, that is also a protected activity.

And so it's important to be mindful of if you are aware of someone transitioning in the workplace.

So what are some work-related changes that may happen for transgender employees?

Some transgender employees may want to make legal changes as a part of their transition, so that's changing their pronouns, they might want to be referred to something else.

Changing their name on their paycheck, driver's license, or identity documents, using a different bathroom.

But not all trans people do want changes.

Changing dress code and uniforms is also another area that I've seen in workplace investigations.

Let HR know HR is best positioned to address it.

Let's talk about bias and discrimination, gender expression.

So a study from the Center of American Progress, the Center for American Progress had a survey which resulted in indicating that trans and gender non-conforming people reported high levels of discrimination at work, as outlined on the slide.

With employment being where they face the highest levels of discrimination.

They also reported discrimination in housing, healthcare, and really all facets of life.

What these percentages increased when the LGBTQIA plus person also identified as a person of color or was a part of another protected group.

Co-workers who identified as heterosexual also attested to the presence of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against LGBTQIA plus individuals.

A Williams Institute report found that 12 to 30% of straight workers witness discrimination in the workforce based on sexual orientation.

A takeaway is that discrimination diminishes productivity, job satisfaction, and mental and physical health of all employees.

So the best thing you can do is stay on top of training and take steps to prevent it to begin with.

Okay, let's talk about retaliation.

So most people are familiar with the concept of retaliation, but what's the actual definition?

Does anyone know the actual definition of retaliation?

Someone does something to you, you retaliate.

Retaliation is prohibited under state and federal law, but also under AP 1000, the city's policy as well.

So retaliation has three elements.

It requires a protected activity, a materially adverse action, and a connection between the two.

It is an easy legal claim to make.

So we tend to see more retaliation-based more retaliation claims in employment claims.

It's important to know that effective January 1st, 2024 legislation was passed, which makes it even easier for an employee to claim retaliation.

Essentially, it creates a rebuttable presumption that an employer has retaliated against an employee if an employer takes an adverse action against an employee within 90 days of the employee having engaged in a protected activity.

So what are some examples of protected activities?

Can anyone provide any examples?

So on the slide, you see some of the more common examples of protected activities.

But what are some lesser known examples?

Maybe filing a lawsuit or being a witness in a lawsuit, communicating with a supervisor, a concern about your wages, hours, terms, and conditions of employment, uh refusing to follow an order, which you think uh would result in discrimination or harassment or something illegal.

Um asking managers or coworkers about salary information.

That's a protected activity you can ask your coworkers about uh their salary to, and it's really to uncover discriminatory uh compensation uh practices.

You can or can't you can, you can you can ask.

Um employers can't ask employees about past uh salary information, but you can ask your colleagues about um their compensation.

They don't have to answer, but you can ask.

Is that like a state thing?

I'm just thinking about I know there's other industries where we're talking about, or at least it's implied.

So it's it's rooted in both federal and state law that employees have a right to discuss their wages, hours, terms, and conditions of employment is is the is the general phrase, and that's really to discover if um there are uh discriminatory or uh discriminatory practices within an employer.

Are you saying that employees have asked?

Or employers?

Employees can ask each other yes about their not employee employers, employers can't ask their employees about past salary that they've made in previous jobs.

Cannot, yes.

Yes, yes, thank you for the question.

Um, also when it comes to represented employees, um participation in an employee organization is also considered a protected activity, as are we know we talked a little bit about union leaders, union leaders have heightened protection when it comes to advocacy about wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment with respect to the members of their union.

Examples of materially adverse actions.

Materially adverse action is the second element required for retaliation.

These are some of the more well-known examples of materially adverse actions, but some other types of adverse actions could be considered, um, switching to a less desirable work shift, um, being inconveniently relocated, uh, or an unsatisfactory job reference.

So on the screen is the City of San Leander's definition of retaliation with an AP 1000.

I won't read it out loud for you, but I'll give you a moment to review it.

Okay.

So it's important to remember that not all negative action is retaliation.

Umployees are, even if they engage in a protected activity, they are still required to follow work rules.

They can still be performance managed.

Um negative action can occur due to poor performance, um, but performance, good performance management is key.

And so this is really when your HR department comes into play, um, you know, ensuring that if misconduct is occurring or poor performance is occurring, that it's documented through performance management.

Um, after a complaint is made and protected activity, or if protected activity occurs, managers just need to be more hyper-vigilant about how they go about maybe effectuating the performance management.

And it's always important to have HR in the loop because they can advise on the bigger picture of what's going on.

But the bottom line, the biggest takeaway, if you take anything away from the slide is to document everything from the beginning because uh poor performance has to be timely managed and it needs to be reported timely.

So preventing abusive conduct, abusive conduct, as I said, is required.

It's required we train on abusive conduct under fiha.

But why does preventing abusive conduct matter?

Did anyone read Dr.

Vivek Murthy's?

He's a former U.S.

surgeon general, the report in uh 2022, the comprehensive report about uh workplace mental health.

Did anyone read that?

Yes.

Okay.

Do you recall what he said about the importance of uh well-being for employees in the workplace?

That's right.

That's right.

He specifically, so his this report was a framework for workplace mental health and well-being.

And um what he said specifically was creating an environment where workers' voices are supported without fear of retaliation is an essential component of healthy organizations.

So when we talk about abusive conduct, well, how do we combat it?

We combat it by ensuring a respectful workplace.

So the definition of abusive conduct is an unwanted negative verbal, visual, or physical behavior with malice conducted by one or more individuals against another individual on any basis, regardless of a protected characteristic that is repeated over time.

So with malice is the significant word here.

It requires malice in the action.

Even if abusive conduct is not always actionable per se, but it is sort of what we call a gateway drug to harassment.

Um it might not rise to the level of a policy violation for abusive conduct, but it can lead to a toxic workplace.

It could also be the basis for other policy violations like a professionalism in the workplace type of policy.

So this is the language from the uh council member handbook, which specifically um calls out refraining from abusive conduct.

And I won't read it out loud, but I'll give you a moment to review it here.

Okay, to the moving on to the next slide.

This is the City of St.

Leandro's definition of abusive conduct in EP 1000.

And I won't read this out loud, but I'll give you a moment to review it.

All right, so let's talk about best practices, um, identifying objective red flags for abusive conduct.

So the common examples are on the screen.

Personalized, demeaning comments, insults, criticism in public, rumors, exclusion.

But some of the more uncommon examples include excessive profanity, shouting or name calling, staring or glaring, or nonverbal demonstrations of hostility.

So maybe you know, passive aggressive silence or ignoring someone as if they're not there, um, encouragement of others to turn against a targeted employee or sabotaging a coworker's uh work product by um undermining their work performance.

That might look like stealing documents that they're working on or ripping pages out of manuals they might rely on to do their job.

Uh, usually a single act alone won't constitute abusive conduct unless it's especially severe or egregious.

So unchecked abusive conduct or bullying have um significant impacts in the workplace, increases um adverse publicity, constituent complaints, cost specifically tied to excessive turnover or the need to do you know more workplace investigations to look into claims, um, and then the loss of trained and effective staff.

It decreases engagement, morale, attendance, and it does cause reputational and organizational damage.

Let's talk about proximity bias.

Now, this comes up maybe more often in hybrid work environments or places with buildings or locations in different states or across the state, but it's a tendency to show favoritism or give preferential treatment to employees who are closest in proximity to them physically.

So common examples of proximity bias include offering the most interesting objects or interesting projects or assignments to people that are on site who you directly work with on a day-to-day basis, excluding remote employees from important meetings or not encouraging them to speak up on calls.

A key driver of proximity bias is assumptions about people, that assumptions that people are more productive in the work environment, as in the physical location as opposed to working from home.

There is just a tendency to overvalue employees that are physically present.

Experts go on to say that employees won't stick around if they feel like they aren't being treated fairly, including through proximity bias.

This can also, proximity bias can disproportionately impact people who are in the role of caretakers, whether it's elderly parents or children or disabled family members or those with disabilities that are whether they're physical or non-visible.

So how do you combat proximity bias?

It's about inclusion and belonging.

You want to invite all the people, all the voices in the room, maybe schedule more team building activities, you know, supervisors taking the initiative to schedule more check-ins and in-person meetings, reoccurring unconscious bias training, and measuring performance by output rather than physical presence in the in the workplace.

All right.

So now we get to the most important part, which is how do we prevent workplace harassment?

Because prevention is the best cure.

So how do we prevent workplace investment harassment?

Strict policies and zero tolerance, strategies to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, like as discussed during training, prompt and effective workplace investigations, prompt and invest an effective follow-up when employees express concern.

There's an urgency to the need to take action, confidentiality where possible, and a clear delineation between workplace appropriate topics versus inappropriate topics.

There are situational risk factors that impact harassment.

Some common examples are on the slide.

But other examples include we talk about decentralized workplaces.

So that's where corporate offices are far removed from frontline employees or first line supervisors, generational differences, young work, young workforces like Gen Z, they're redefining workplace norms.

So the new norms might come with risks, think startup environments.

Whereas older workforces, they might have a harder time adjusting to new societal norms, such as use of pronouns or like pronunciation explainers.

Does everyone know what that is?

Pronunciation explainer.

Sometimes in a signature line, you'll see people spell out their names phonetically to help the reader know how to pronounce their names.

Harassment is more likely to occur when there is a lack of diversity in the workforce, but workplaces that are extremely diverse can also pose a risk factor for harassment if ongoing proper training isn't provided to support the environment.

Another risk factor is workplaces that don't conform to workplace norms.

So think like blue collar auto shops or workspaces like that.

Oh, sorry, workplace bystander intervention behaviors.

Okay, so bystander intervention is another important way to prevent workplace harassment.

Um what does bystander intervention behaviors mean?

So there's three D's that are a part of bystander intervention.

Does anyone know the three D's?

It's direct, distract, and delegate.

So direct means to directly address the situation.

For example, if you see someone trying to put something offensive on your colleague's desk, you can directly address the situation by suggesting that they don't do that.

Distract.

Distract means finding a way to redirect that person's attention.

Maybe before they put the offensive object on their colleague's desk.

You start to talk to them about a recent holiday to distract them from this action they're about to take.

Delegate, meaning initiate initiating help.

You call HR, you call security to intervene at what you're observing.

As supervisors, all of you are required to report if you see something that could constitute discrimination, harassment, or retaliation.

You shouldn't it, you shouldn't decide whether it does, you just report it to HR, and then HR would make the decision.

Employees should bottom line is employees should feel that they have a positive impact on the workplace, specifically on the culture through their own behavior and by upholding the expectations of others.

So what about harassment of colleague at work?

We talked earlier about the survey that was conducted, and especially against LGBTQIA folks and what they've experienced in the workplace.

But according to a latter survey, 45% of employees witnessed sexual harassment, and 40%, 42% did nothing about it.

Employees reported the most common way they are harassed is based on gender and sex, which was at 50%, race and ethnicity was at 17%, religion at 15%, and sexual orientation at 13%.

So again, why don't people speak up about it?

The same respondents in the survey reported a fear of a hostile work environment, fear of retaliation from the employer, and fear that management wouldn't properly handle the situation.

The City of San Leandro has a very comprehensive complaint procedure that's also outlined in AP 1000.

I won't read it out loud, but I'll give you a moment to review it here.

So we are running a little short on time, so I'm gonna zoom through these a little bit.

But your resources as an elected official, if um you uh yourself feel like you explain you've experienced discrimination, harassment, retaliation, um you should file a complaint with the city attorney where there, you know, you can consider a third-party investigation and discuss the with the city attorney any concerns about liability.

And I understand um your council member handbook is quite comprehensive as to remedial action against elected officials, but these are some of the examples of what remedial action might look like.

Counseling, action under a misconduct policy or procedure, and workplace violence restraining order.

Confidentiality confidentiality of workplace matters is important to discuss.

Umployer confidential confidentiality is required, especially with employee employees have privacy rights under the California Constitution, Article One.

Um, but there are sometimes legal obligations that require disclosure, like if there's an EEOC investigation or an investigation by the Department of Civil Rights.

Um, when workplace investigations are conducted for employees, uh there's always an admonition that's given that you know we endeavor to keep confidential, but can't guarantee it, knowing that there are sometimes times where information has to be released.

The practical impact to employers, however, is that if there's publicity around an investigation, it sometimes limits the employer's ability to talk about an investigation publicly.

But it's important to know that as elected officials, um, if there were employee investigations that became uh public and needed to be discussed.

Okay, so this is an example, and I won't spend too much uh time on this since we're running low on time, but um it is it is something that you can look up on your own, which is a 2023 case in which a commissioner provided feedback on her views on a future housing development.

And specifically, she wrote an email with the language she was blaming rich white anti housing men for thwarting future housing developments in town.

And the council voted to censure her in twenty twenty-three because they felt her comments were racist against white people.

And the city council took the following actions.

And in fact, they took punitive action instead of following their own manual.

So ultimately, the council did remove the censure.

Okay, so let's talk about compliance.

Again, as elected officials, you are supervisors under FIHA, and supervisors are required to report.

Supervisors who sexually harassed can be held personally liable.

Again, you don't make the assessment if you observe it.

And the best practices if you see something, say something.

Okay, so now we're going to break up into groups for hypotheticals.

Before we do that, I'll just do a quick check.

Does anyone need to take a break?

Okay.

So if we can just come back in five minutes, six seventeen, um, we'll restart.

Okay.

All right, we're gonna get back started.

Okay.

All right.

So um, we're gonna break you all into groups.

Um, so we're gonna do two groups.

You have the hypotheticals in the packet in front of you.

Um, so for the first group, Council Member Bowen, Council Member Bolt, uh, Council Member Acevedo, we'll put you in one group.

Um, and you're gonna focus on case study number one.

Uh, group number two, um, council member Simon, Council Member Aguilar, Council Member I'm sorry if I mispronounced it Sibida Vivarus Walton.

I'm sorry if I mispronounce it.

Sibide Vivarus Walton.

Okay, Vivarus Walton, thank you, and then um, Councilmember.

Um, I'm missing someone.

Oh, yes, and Mayor Gonzalez, thank you.

Um, you'll be in group number two, and you are going to focus on case study number two.

So um, I'm gonna give you ten minutes.

Um, you'll go through the hypothetical with your group.

Um, you'll need to assign a speaker who's going to report back on the questions.

You're going to answer the questions with your group members as well.

So, ten minutes, and then you'll have five minutes to report out.

Does everyone know what group they're in?

Yeah.

Yeah, you can go down here also.

Yep.

So, two groups.

Yep.

So, yeah.

Okay.

I know.

Start?

Okay.

All right.

I I know ten minutes is not enough time.

I'm sorry, in the interest of time, we're trying to get through both hypotheticals.

So each group is gonna have um five minutes to go through.

I just want a high level summary for the other group as to the fact pattern and then uh go through each question and answer the questions.

So let's start with group one.

Who is the designated spokesperson?

Okay, council member bolt.

Uh yes, so in our scenario we had uh touched on three people um across a few different lines.

So I'll just answer some of the questions.

Did Fernanda do anything wrong here?

Um and though she didn't do a good follow-up and in fact kind of fumbled it.

Uh once she finds out about the rumors that were happening and and didn't really do anything about it.

So um uh what would she have done differently?

Number one would we thought she should have gone to HR immediately to help her through the situation.

Okay.

Uh additionally did some good follow-up and take the the accusations credibly and and more appropriately.

Um was Fernanda correct in handling the situation by herself without involving HR.

We just said no.

Uh we think she should have um what do you think Bailey's conduct toward Jonathan was it harassing uh base on national origin or sex when we put both uh the fact that um he was calling saying she was exotic or saying he she was saying he was exotic and and uh and then asked where uh he was from starts to bring in the um uh national origin and then of course sex saying uh just enjoying the show and then uh touching the bicep and and appropriate ways.

Uh what do you think Jonathan's conduct is?

Uh what could he have done differently?

Um so we thought maybe he could have gone above for like when he felt that it wasn't being addressed, could have gone straight to HR himself.

Um if it's if it was a public sector, would it change our analysis?

No, we still feel all this is the same regardless.

All these things should have happened the appropriate way, regardless of being public or private sector.

Okay.

Um Bailey's conduct towards Lola, was it harass harassing, yes.

Uh gender expression or gender orientation, uh both.

Um could Lola have a claim against Bailey for her treatment of Jonathan.

The way Bailey treated Lola, yes, definitely a case.

Um kind of stumbled a little bit on what 'cause this is a claim.

So we know that uh Bailey could definitely have gone and and waged a complaint for what Bailey witnessed, but when it says a claim, we were unsure of what that meant.

Yeah, so Lola witnessed Bailey's misconduct against Jonathan, right?

Right.

So as the third party, if she was offended by that conduct, she still has the ability to bring a claim of sexual harassment or whatever she observed it to be in a claim could mean either a complaint at HR, uh a claim at the civil rights department, or something more beyond filing a complaint within the actual workplace.

So the answer to that one would be yes.

Yes, exactly.

And did you all um did you all note the comment about uh where are you from, where are you really from?

Could that be a microaggression?

Yes, you consider that a microaggression.

Okay, great.

Um and then what about uh Fernanda's scheduling of a meeting between Jonathan and Bailey?

Was that uh did you think that was a good idea, or that's something that could have been done differently?

Um I mean, looking back how it unfolded, no, that's not a good idea.

You should have got HR involved.

Um, you know, initially to say, hey, what's going on?

I don't see that as a problem, but I think it's a problem as it unfolded and nothing went forward after.

Maybe maybe I'm wrong in that.

I don't know.

I think generally speaking, if there's some kind of tension between employees, always best to just get HR involved, and then through other facilitated processes, there could be an opportunity to bring them together and sort of like an unofficial mediation or something, instead of doing it informally this way.

That's what I would have suggested.

Good job.

Great job.

Okay, um, case study number two.

Group two, who is your uh representative?

Okay, great.

Uh the odd coworker, we think um so uh we had the uh case study number two, the odd co-worker, Lead Things Elementary School Um hires a new teacher.

Uh and Natasha's a new hire, uh, and there are other uh folks involved.

Julie um co-workers, Carla and um, I believe HR, who is uh Christine, um who Natasha reports.

So Natasha is experiencing um inappropriate behavior um with regards to question one.

Where do you draw the line between odd weird behavior and unacceptable conduct?

Um to kind of summarize um Julie, Carla and Natasha all have experience inappropriate behavior from Joe.

And Natasha goes on a school conference and shares the experience of the inappropriate advances, touching comments to Julie and Carla and Carla and Julie share similar stories.

Um did not report what had happened on previous trips, uh, but Natasha does finally report what happened to Christine, and as a result, um the there was an investigation in Learn Things Elementary School terminates Joe for inappropriate conduct towards Natasha.

So where do you go?

Or where do you draw the line between odd or weird behavior and unacceptable conduct?

Did Joe's conduct cross the line?

Um we said yes, the you know, the odd things where he talked about uh that he likes stringy things, that he loves both men and women.

Um the weird thing is that he you know he also said that the he loved the educational aspect of porn, and he made some hot comments.

I mean, some comments about his um subordinates um indicating that there were you know hot mamas or what have you.

Um so that that all crossed the line.

Number two, should Joe's co-workers have told Joe directly that his conduct bothered them?

Um said, but also it depends how comfortably the person experiencing the harassment feels to report it.

Um they can go directly to HR.

Should Natasha have said something to her boss Joe?

Again.

Um I said yes.

My some of my other colleagues said no, unless she feels safe to do so.

Um number four, how does the power dynamic between Joe and Natasha impact this case?

Natasha is a subordinate.

Um, and there is fear of retaliation if she feels like she would say anything.

How are Julie and Carla's experiences relative relative to Natasha's?

They are both in the same position.

Um, and both have shared that they've experienced uh and did not say anything but did share it with their with their colleagues.

Did Learn Things Elementary do everything it could to prevent Joe's inappropriate conduct?

Yes, they did, they conclude the they did the investigation and they decided to terminate Joe for inappropriate conduct towards Natasha.

And did they act appropriately in terminating Joe's employment?

So we didn't get that far.

Okay, great job.

But if she didn't, then going to HR is the right call, and still inevitably going to HR is probably still the right thing to do, even if she said something.

Did you all talk about the possibility of Joe's these shared experiences with Joe being evidence of pattern in practice?

No, we didn't.

Oh, yeah, yeah.

Okay.

I time crunch.

Okay.

Well, great job.

Um, we have one more hypothetical.

We're gonna get ten minutes and then a couple minutes to report back.

So same groups, please.

Group number one, you're gonna do case study number three, and group number two, you'll do case study number four.

Okay, so if we can come back at six fifty two, that would be great.

Okay.

Um four minutes each for each group to report back.

Just high-level summary if you have time of what your scenario was, and or you could just go through the questions and answers.

Uh let's start with group one case study three.

Okay, so case study three, uh Mr.

Creeper is not an employee of So what is the responsibility or is there any responsibility?

The answer is yes.

Um the answer number two is you know, you could you kick 'em out, tell him you can't come back, right?

If he keeps doing these these type of actions.

Uh three, we put uh uh there there shouldn't well i any any protected class is like that's the line.

So once they start to discriminate against any of that, that's the line.

Oh the caution request transfer.

And the firm could have maybe taken some steps to put barriers between people's between them, between them, yeah.

Okay.

Uh we number four was no.

Um because that's um you know, you can't just switch it over because the guy's being a creep to the man.

So it might be, did you consider disparate impact, perhaps?

Um we're on number four, right?

Yes.

Yeah, disparate impact, perhaps of transferring all current matters if they were to honor that request.

Um what we said no, we we don't like the actions.

Okay.

So we were like, nah.

Okay.

Uh what responsibilities does Julia uh well, since she was already invited and then she heard now this is the second time something's happened.

She does have responsibility to say something we felt.

Um about these incidents.

Yes, uh number six was yes, and then uh uh seven, it was, you know, what are the what is the um pub like the people, the clients have and it voice their concerns and if nothing changes, take their money elsewhere.

That's right.

Good job.

Any other feedback from that group?

Group one?

No?

Okay.

Group two hypothetical four.

Okay.

So for question one, I'll just do a quick kind of overview.

It is in it's set in a company in Silicon Valley, there is a supervisor, there's a culture of teasing and jokes that are con ageist, there's a lot of drinking outside of work hours, but it kind of bleeds into the work.

A position opens up, a supervisor gives it to a younger person, both in similar experience to the older person.

Um, so that's the scenario that we were dealing with.

Um so in terms of question one is there anything wrong with the joking around?

And uh it's not okay.

Um, especially when jokes are at the expense of a particular co-worker or colleague.

And number two is our assessment of the statement of the person who did not get the promotion who was offended by drinking and age jokes.

Um yeah, I mean, it was a it was a culture that she did not feel like she connected to, and she felt like she had to keep it up in order to be part of it.

Uh question three should co-workers have realized that their jokings could become problematic.

Yes.

Um, however, there was no formal training given to um so it's a startup and they had not received any kind of harassment training.

So it's a risk to this to the business or the place of work.

And number four, do co-workers bear any responsibility for monitoring their behavior in the workplace?

Absolutely.

Number five, should Lorena have intervened and stopped the joking?

Um, yes.

As there is all of their supervisors, she should have stepped in it, um, especially because they were teasing specifically to protected categories or classes like age and gender.

Um, six, can outside conduct work between friends, yes.

So uh it can.

And then seven, how should the situation be handled?

At that particular point where we were in the scenario, there needed to be an investigation slash involve, um, and then follow up with training.

And then the group also said once the training happened, there needs to be a culture of accountability.

So if you see something, say something.

I'll leave it there because we're out of time.

Okay.

Was that my timer?

That was not your that was my timer.

Oh, minute.

That's my time.

Okay, okay.

Uh fantastic.

Let me ask you this.

Did y'all consider whether Lorena enabled the behavior by facilitating the drinking games?

Yeah, it was a permissive culture that she actively participated in.

So yes, we didn't talk about that.

Great.

Okay, fantastic.

Good job.

Um, so just to wrap up here, just a few reminders.

Employers need to provide one hour of training to employees and two to supervisors every two years.

Elected officials are required training within six months of being elected, and every two years thereafter, please review the city's policy and the council member handbook and remember that compliance is your duty.

Thank you very much.

Well done.

And so with that, we come to the conclusion of our meeting.

It is 6 58, and we will take a pause for a couple of minutes.

And what we start at seven.

We are returned.