Reno v. Baird

In Reno v. Baird (1998) 18 Cal. 4th 640, a registered nurse who alleged that she had been discharged because she had cancer, sued her former supervisor for employment discrimination under the FEHA and for discharge in violation of public policy. Our Supreme Court held that the language of the statute indicates that the Legislature did not intend individual supervisory employees to be held liable for employment discrimination. The court noted that the statutory language regarding discrimination differs from other prohibitions under the FEHA ( 12900 et seq.). The prohibition regarding discrimination under the FEHA applies only to "an employer" ( 12940, subd. (a)), whereas the prohibition against harassment, for example, applies to "an employer . . . or any other person" ( 12940, subd. (j)(1)). ( Reno v. Baird, supra, 18 Cal. 4th at pp. 643-644.) The court held that the cause of action for discharge in violation of public policy must fall as well because the underlying public policy was the alleged discrimination in violation of the FEHA. The court reasoned that "it would be absurd to forbid a plaintiff to sue a supervisor under the FEHA, then allow essentially the same action under a different rubric. Because plaintiff may not sue Baird as an individual supervisor under the FEHA, she may not sue her individually for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy." ( Reno v. Baird, supra, 18 Cal. 4th at p. 664.)