Discrimination in Housing and Employment

1
Discrimination in Housing and Employment

• Similarities and Differences
• Susan Saylor
• Associate Chief Counsel
• Department of Fair Employment and Housing
• Oakland Legal Unit

2
The Evolution of Fair Housing Law
3
Four Step Analysis

• Parallels between Title VII and Title VIII
• Employment discrimination precedent borrowing
  and guidance
• Substantial equivalency
• Liberal construction

4
Parallels between Title VII and Title VIII

• Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42
  U.S.C.A. 2000e-2 et seq. Employment
  discrimination

• Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, 42
  U.S.C.A. 3601 et seq. Fair Housing Act (FHA)

5
Role of Employment Discrimination Precedent

• We apply Title VII discrimination analysis in
  examining Fair Housing Act (FHA) discrimination
  claims. (Gamble v. City of Escondido (9th Cir.
  1997) 104 F. 3d 300, 304.)
• Principles at issue in cases of employment
  discrimination are often applied in housing
  discrimination cases. (Auburn Woods I Homeowners
  Association v. Fair Employment and Housing
  Commission (2004) 121 Cal. App. 4th 1578, 1591

6
Substantial Equivalency

• FEHA is intended to be substantially equivalent
  to the Fair Housing Act (FHA)
• FEHA in the housing area is thus intended to
  conform to the general requirements of federal
  law in the area and may provide greater
  protection against discrimination. (Brown v.
  Smith (1997) 55 Cal. App. 4th 767, 780.)

7
The FEHA is to be liberally construed and is
independent from federal law
8
Borrowed Concepts from Employment Law

• How to prove discrimination
• McDonnel Douglas burden-shifting analysis for
  circumstantial evidence of intentional
  discrimination
• Availability of disparate impact theory

9
Imperfect transfer of ideas from employment to
housing

• Harassment
• Reasonable Accommodation

10
Differences

• How Housing Discrimination Law is Unique
• Who is your client?
• Standing
• Procedure
• Damages

11
Who is your client?
12
Standing

• Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (1972)
  409 U.S. 205, 210 Any person harmed by a
  discriminatory act has standing to sue.
• Plaintiffs alleged that they were harmed by
  living in a racially segregated community
• The person on the landlords blacklist is not
  the only victim of discriminatory housing
  practices it is the whole community.

13
Plaintiffs

• Anyone who claims to have been injured by a
  discriminatory housing practice
• Persons who believe they will be injured by a
  discriminatory housing practice that is about to
  occur.
• Testers
• Fair Housing Councils

14
Procedure

• No exhaustion requirement

15
Damages

• Compensatory and Punitive Damages
• Humiliation, Embarrassment, Emotional Distress,
  and Other Intangible Harms
• Fair Housing Council Damages
• Unruh Statutory Damages
• 4,000 per discriminatory act

16
THE END