XPost: talk.politics.guns, fl.general, sac.politics   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, rec.arts.disney.parks   
   From: democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov   
      
   https://news.yahoo.com/florida-employers-know-desantis-approves-   
   100000337.html   
      
   Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to soon sign legislation that will open a   
   new front in how employers will need to think about workplace activities   
   and set new state guidelines for what would constitute “unlawful   
   employment practices.”   
      
   House Bill 7, titled “Individual Freedom,” was one of the most contentious   
   pieces of legislation considered by lawmakers during the legislative   
   session that ended in mid-March. While much of the attention focused on   
   the restrictions that would be applied to the classroom, the bill could   
   also alter Florida businesses’ labor practices — in particular restricting   
   how employers present programs aimed at promoting diversity, equity and   
   inclusion at work.   
      
   READ MORE: The “anti-woke” bill has potentially negative impact on Florida   
   universities, too   
      
   Ellen M. Leibovitch, an employment lawyer based in Boca Raton, says   
   employers who offer training to employees on discrimination and harassment   
   should be prepared to tailor the curriculum and presentation of their   
   training programs.   
      
   “I think that employers are maybe not going to be doing these trainings   
   anymore, or they’re going to do these trainings so neutral as to really   
   not have the intended impact that they are supposed to have,” Leibovitch   
   said.   
      
   The push comes as DeSantis and Florida Republicans take aim at “corporate   
   wokeness” and publicly clash with The Walt Disney Company over the   
   company’s opposition to a bill banning the teaching of gender-related   
   issues to kids younger than third grade — and potentially higher grades.   
      
   How the law changes   
   In practice, the bill would amend the Florida Civil Rights Act and make it   
   unlawful for employers to subject workers to “training, instruction, or   
   any other required activity” that promotes or compels them to believe the   
   following concepts:   
      
   That virtues such as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness, neutrality,   
   objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or sexist, or were   
   created by members of a particular race, color, sex, or national origin to   
   oppress members of another race, color, sex or national origin.   
   That members of one race, color sex, or national origin are morally   
   superior to members of another race, color, sex or national origin.   
   That an individual’s moral character or status as either privileged or   
   oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her race, color, sex, or   
   national origin.   
   That an individual, by virtue of their race, color, sex, or national   
   origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously   
   or unconsciously.   
   That members of one race, color, sex, or national origin cannot and should   
   not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, sex, or   
   national origin.   
   That a member of one race, color, sex or national origin cannot and should   
   not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, sex or   
   national origin.   
   That an individual, by virtue of their race, color, sex, or national   
   origin, bears responsibility for and must feel guilt, anguish, or other   
   forms of psychological distress because of actions committed in the past   
   by other members of the same race, color, sex, or national origin.   
   That an individual, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex, or national   
   origin, should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment to   
   achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.   
   Potential fallout for employers   
   If an employee believes their employer has violated any of those   
   principles when delivering a training program, they can sue and pursue a   
   claim for relief, including damages and attorneys’ fees.   
      
   The potential of lawsuits as an enforcement mechanism are likely to have a   
   chilling effect on how employers convey certain diversity and inclusion   
   goals in training sessions, according to some labor lawyers and   
   consultants in the human resources field.   
      
   Supporters say the bill is meant to protect workers from being told they   
   should feel bad about historical wrongs committed by people of their same   
   race, gender or national origin.   
      
   The bill sponsor, Rep. Bryan Avila, R-Miami Springs, acknowledged part of   
   the intent is to eliminate workplace programs that promote the concept of   
   “white privilege” and broadly singled out training programs promoted by   
   Walt Disney Co., Coca-Cola, American Express and Google, that he said   
   would be in violation of the bill.   
      
   “Whether it is training on how to be less oppressive, or less white, all   
   those things should not be occurring,” Avila said in a committee hearing   
   in February. “All of those things are counterproductive to where we want   
   to be as a nation, state, as a community.”   
      
   A solution for ‘a problem that doesn’t exist’   
   Penny Morey, a human resources executive and consultant with more than 30   
   years of experience in the field, said she has never encountered a   
   training session curriculum that espouses the concepts the bill seeks to   
   ban.   
      
   The problem, she argued, is that the bill could trigger lawsuits based on   
   how someone perceives the delivery of a training program.   
      
   “This law is trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist,” she said. “But   
   please know that when I say bogus lawsuits exist, they do. People can find   
   an attorney that works on contingency now and then, who will take   
   something like this because it may make them some money on a contingency   
   basis. They may get some publicly, they may get some attention — and that   
   is going to be the chilling effect.”   
      
   Morey said she believes most companies and employers will likely “wait and   
   see” how the bill is rolled out and what the reaction is among employees.   
      
   “I think the danger is that a lot of employers — and I don’t particularly   
   blame them — will say ‘let’s step back away and take that out for now and   
   let’s tackle it later when we know better about how this is going to be   
   enforced,’ ” she said.   
      
   Unintended consequences?   
   Another issue is that part of the reason why employers have training   
   programs in the first place is to insulate themselves from liability,   
   Leibovitch said. Training sessions can offer employers a layer of   
   protection to say they tried to prevent wrongdoing in the workplace if an   
   employee acts inappropriately. The company can still be liable, but those   
   programs can show they tried to tell employers not to act in a certain   
   way.   
      
   “If you don’t do the training then you really have no defense that you   
   were trying to prevent,” said Sen. Tina Polsky, D-Boca Raton, a labor and   
   employment attorney.   
      
   If an employer goes through with a training program that could put them at   
   risk of a lawsuit, they will also need to take into consideration their   
   insurance policies.   
      
   “The insurance that employers buy may not cover this yet because it is so   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)