In City of Oakland v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 261, the Court of Appeal concluded "The Legislature's 'good faith personnel action' exemption is meant to furnish an employer a degree of freedom in making its regular and routine personnel decisions (such as discipline, work evaluation, transfer, demotion, layoff, or termination). If a regular and routine personnel decision is made and carried out with subjective good faith and the employer's conduct meets the objective reasonableness standard, section 3208.3's exemption applies." (City of Oakland v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 99 Cal.App.4th at p. 267.) The Court of Appeal further agreed with the board's interpretation of the good faith standard in Larch v. Contra Costa County (1998) 63 Cal.Comp.Cases 831. The Court of Appeal stated: "We agree with the Board's importation of the objective good faith standard from Cotran v. Rollins Hudig Hall Internat., Inc. (1998). . . . Larch quoted extensively from Cotran, borrowing the 'objective good faith standard' and explaining in its own words that 'any analysis of the good faith issue . . . must look at the totality of the circumstances, not a rigid standard, in determining whether the action was taken in good faith. To be in good faith, the personnel action must be done in a manner that is lacking outrageous conduct, is honest and with a sincere purpose, is without an intent to mislead, deceive, or defraud, and is without collusion or unlawful design.'" (City of Oakland v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 99 Cal.App.4th at p. 267.)