Sexual Harassment Lawyers in Burbank
- Last Updated:
What California Law Covers and What You Should Do First
California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Gov. Code § 12940(j)(1), prohibits sexual harassment of employees, applicants, unpaid interns, volunteers, and independent contractors. When a supervisor is the harasser, the employer is strictly liable with no proof of prior knowledge required. You must file a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) within three years of the last act of harassment before you can sue in civil court. That deadline is real: missing it permanently bars your FEHA claim.
Who California Law Protects and What Conduct It Covers
FEHA’s harassment protections extend well beyond full-time employees. Under Gov. Code § 12940(j)(1), protected persons include:
- Current employees and job applicants
- Unpaid interns and volunteers
- Independent contractors and persons providing services pursuant to a contract
Under Gov. Code § 12940(j)(4)(C), “harassment because of sex” expressly includes sexual harassment, gender harassment, and harassment based on pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. Critically, sexually harassing conduct does not need to be motivated by sexual desire. A manager who targets a male subordinate with crude gender-based insults, or who harasses a pregnant employee with demeaning comments about her condition, is engaging in conduct covered by FEHA even if no romantic or sexual interest exists.
For harassment claims, FEHA applies to employers with five or more employees. This threshold is narrower than many workers assume, and it covers the vast majority of Burbank workplaces, including film and television production companies, healthcare facilities, restaurants, and retail stores.
Two Forms of Actionable Sexual Harassment Under FEHA
Quid Pro Quo Harassment
Quid pro quo harassment occurs when a person in authority conditions a job benefit (a promotion, a shift, continued employment) on submission to sexual conduct, or threatens a job consequence for refusing. Because the harasser uses supervisory authority to impose the condition, employer liability is direct.
Hostile Work Environment: What “Severe or Pervasive” Actually Means in California
A hostile work environment claim requires conduct that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of employment and create a working environment a reasonable person would find hostile or abusive. The victim must also subjectively perceive the environment as hostile. This is a two-part test: objective and subjective.
California goes further than federal law. Gov. Code § 12923, added by the Legislature in 2018, explicitly provides that a single incident of harassing conduct can be sufficient to create a triable issue of hostile work environment if that incident is severe enough. Courts apply a totality-of-the-circumstances analysis. A single act of unwanted physical touching, a graphic sexual image sent to a coworker, or one severe verbal assault may each independently support a claim under California law where a comparable federal claim might fail.
Illustrative scenario: A Burbank production assistant receives one explicit photograph from her department head via work messaging. She reports it to HR. HR tells her the matter is “resolved” after a private conversation with the department head, and the assistant continues working in the same department. Under § 12923’s single-incident rule and the employer’s obligation under § 12940(j)(1) to take immediate and appropriate corrective action, both the original act and the employer’s inadequate response may support liability. This is a pattern our firm sees frequently in entertainment industry workplaces.
Who Can Be Held Liable: Employer, Supervisor, and Individual Coworker
Strict Employer Liability for Supervisor Harassment
When a supervisor harasses a subordinate, the employer is strictly liable under Gov. Code § 12940(j)(1). The California Supreme Court confirmed this rule in State Dept. of Health Servs. v. Superior Court (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1026, 1042: no showing of the employer’s negligence or prior knowledge is required. The limit is that strict liability applies when the supervisor acts in a supervisory capacity; it does not attach to purely private conduct completely unconnected with employment and not occurring at the workplace or during working hours.
Employer Liability for Coworker Harassment
For harassment by non-supervisory coworkers, the employer is liable if it knew or should have known of the conduct and failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action (Gov. Code § 12940(j)(1)). A prior written complaint, a pattern of documented incidents, or a history of similar reports about the same coworker can each establish that the employer “should have known.” Separately, Gov. Code § 12940(k) makes it an independent unlawful employment practice to fail to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent harassment from occurring.
Personal Liability of the Individual Harasser
Under Gov. Code § 12940(j)(3), any individual employee who personally commits harassment is personally liable, regardless of whether the employer knew or took corrective action. This means a named coworker, peer, or supervisor can be sued individually. Many workers do not realize this. In cases where an employer is judgment-proof or disputes knowledge, personal liability against the individual harasser can be a critical pathway to recovery.
If harassment at work led to your termination, that may give rise to a separate wrongful termination claim in Burbank alongside the harassment claim.
Filing Deadlines Every Burbank Worker Needs to Know
Legal Track | Agency | Deadline | What Starts the Clock | What Happens If You Miss It
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
California FEHA | California Civil Rights Department (CRD) | 3 years from the last act of harassment | Most recent incident, not the first | FEHA civil lawsuit permanently barred |
FEHA civil lawsuit | California Superior Court | 1 year from CRD right-to-sue notice | Date notice is issued by CRD | Civil claim time-barred |
Federal Title VII | EEOC | 300 days from the act of harassment | Date of alleged harassment | Federal Title VII claim barred (exceptions may apply) |
Under Gov. Code § 12960, the three-year FEHA clock runs from the most recent act of harassment, which may give workers more time than they expect when harassment was ongoing. FEHA claimants may also request an immediate right-to-sue notice from the California Civil Rights Department without waiting for the agency to finish its investigation, allowing faster access to civil court. Federal EEOC charges must generally be filed within 300 days; consult with counsel about whether exceptions apply to your situation.
Understanding these deadlines is one reason to consult a Burbank employment lawyer promptly, even if you are unsure whether your situation rises to the level of a claim.
What You Can Recover in a California Sexual Harassment Case
A prevailing FEHA plaintiff may recover the following categories of damages:
- Back pay and front pay: Lost wages and future earning losses where harassment caused constructive discharge or termination
- Emotional distress damages: Uncapped under FEHA, unlike federal Title VII which imposes per-plaintiff caps
- Punitive damages: Available where the employer’s conduct was malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent under Civil Code § 3294
- Attorney’s fees and costs: Mandatory award against the employer when the plaintiff prevails
For context on what these cases have resolved for in California, see our guides on average sexual harassment settlements in California and past sexual harassment settlement amounts. Every case turns on its own facts; no outcome is guaranteed.
Employer Training Failures as Evidence of Liability
Gov. Code § 12950.1, as amended by SB 1343 (2018), requires all employers with five or more employees to provide:
- At least one hour of interactive sexual harassment prevention training for non-supervisory employees
- At least two hours for supervisory employees
- Refresher training every two years
- Training for new hires and newly promoted supervisors within six months of hire or promotion
When an employer skips this training, or fails to act on prior complaints, that failure is direct evidence of a § 12940(k) violation. A common employer defense is that it acted reasonably once it learned of the harassment. But if supervisors were never trained, or if HR conducted a superficial “investigation” and returned the harasser to the same department, those facts undercut the defense. Document whether your employer ever provided training, who investigated your complaint, what the outcome was, and how quickly the employer responded.
If harassment at work was connected to broader discrimination based on sex or another protected characteristic, our Burbank employment discrimination attorneys handle those overlapping claims as well.
How Sexual Harassment Lawyers Evaluate and Build a Case
What Lawyers Look for in the First Consultation
- Whether the harasser was a supervisor or coworker (determines liability standard)
- Whether the employer was notified and what it did in response
- Evidence of a pattern: prior complaints about the same person, prior incidents in the same department
- Whether training records show compliance or non-compliance with § 12950.1
- Timeline of events relative to the CRD three-year window
- Whether any adverse employment action followed (demotion, schedule change, termination, forced resignation)
Evidence You Should Preserve Now
- Text messages, emails, voicemails, and direct messages from the harasser
- Screenshots of any digital communications (save to a personal device, not a work system)
- Written records of each incident: date, time, location, what was said or done, who was present
- Any HR complaints you submitted and the employer’s written responses
- Names and contact information of witnesses who observed the conduct or the aftermath
- Performance reviews from before and after the harassment began
What This Means If You Were Harassed at a Burbank Workplace
California law is broader than federal law and almost certainly covers your situation, whether you work for a large entertainment studio or a five-person medical office. The three-year CRD filing window runs from the last incident, so if harassment was ongoing, your clock may be longer than you think, but it is running now. If a supervisor was involved, you do not need to prove the employer knew: strict liability attaches. If a coworker was the harasser, document whether you reported it and what the employer did. Preserve every digital communication before returning or losing access to work devices. The single most important step you can take today is a confidential consultation with a sexual harassment lawyer who can assess your specific timeline and the strength of your evidence before the deadline closes.
Frequently Asked Questions From Burbank Workers
Does the harassment have to happen repeatedly to be actionable in California?
No. Under Gov. Code § 12923, a single severe incident can be sufficient to support a hostile work environment claim under FEHA. California law explicitly rejected the more restrictive federal approach that generally requires repeated conduct.
Can I sue my coworker directly, not just my employer?
Yes. Gov. Code § 12940(j)(3) makes any individual employee who personally commits harassment personally liable, regardless of whether the employer knew or responded. A coworker, peer, or manager can each be named as a defendant.
My HR department said the complaint was “resolved.” Does that prevent me from filing a claim?
No. An internal HR finding does not bar a FEHA claim. Whether the employer took “immediate and appropriate corrective action” is a factual question that a court or the CRD will evaluate independently. An inadequate investigation or a response that returned you to work near the harasser may itself support liability.
I never made a formal report. Can I still file a claim?
Yes, for purposes of filing with the CRD and pursuing a civil lawsuit. Unreported harassment does not automatically bar a FEHA claim. However, whether the employer “knew or should have known” matters for coworker harassment liability, and your failure to report may affect that analysis. An attorney can advise you on how to frame the timeline.
How long do I have to decide?
You have three years from the most recent act of harassment to file a complaint with the CRD under Gov. Code § 12960. After a right-to-sue notice is issued, you have one additional year to file in civil court. Do not wait until the deadline is close to consult an attorney.
Contact Setareh Law Group: If you work in Burbank or the surrounding area and have experienced sexual harassment at work, Setareh Law Group is available for a confidential consultation. Our firm handles California employment and labor law matters on a contingency basis. Contact us to discuss your situation with an attorney who can evaluate your claim, your timeline, and your options.
Contact us today:
📞 Phone: 310-888-7771
✉️ Email: help@setarehlaw.com
🌐 Address: 420 N Camden Dr, Beverly Hills CA, 90210
Disclaimer: This article is general legal information about California employment law and is provided for educational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case depends on its specific facts, and outcomes cannot be guaranteed. If you believe you have a sexual harassment claim, consult a qualified California employment attorney to evaluate your particular situation.
Sources and Additional Resources
Authoritative sources cited
- Gov. Code § 12940(j)(1)
- Gov. Code § 12923
- Gov. Code § 12960
- California Civil Rights Department
- Civil Code § 3294
- Gov. Code § 12950.1
Related Setareh Law Group resources
Table of Contents
- verified by Trustindex
