By: Olivia Hines
Following widely-reported allegations of sexual harassment and gender-based discrimination at video game company Activision Blizzard (“Blizzard”), lawsuits were filed first by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) and then by the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Now, the EEOC has proposed an $18 million settlement for its case.[1] The EEOC settlement agreement was proposed before DFEH concluded its investigation.[2] The DFEH has filed an objection to prevent the settlement from being approved by a judge before the end of its own investigation.[3]
The DFEH is the California agency designated to advocate for civil rights, including discrimination.[4] The EEOC is a federal agency that investigates discrimination during the course of employment.[5] The two agencies operate with a work-sharing agreement, in place since 1981.[6] This workshare agreement has, until the Blizzard case, allowed the two agencies to operate and function cohesively, including one agency deferring to the other agency’s investigation regarding similar matters.[7]
However, the Blizzard suit has brought the two agencies to bat with each other. In addition to monetary compensation, the EEOC’s proposed settlement would require the Blizzard employees to release further claims under the state laws of California, fully encompassing the claims in DFEH’s lawsuit.[8] While this general release language has been used before, this additional release of claims is contrary to other cases where claims were released with the exception of claims already filed with DFEH.[9] Thus, DFEH argues that the settlement would be detrimental to their pending action and investigation.[10] DFEH has filed an objection to the proposed settlement, citing “irreparable harm” and “the effective destruction and/or tampering of evidence”.[11]
Previously, the agencies’ work-sharing agreement has prevented the adversarial nature found with Blizzard’s case, as the agencies generally have similar goals.[12] However, the conflict between DFEH and the EEOC have ventured into uncharted waters, setting new precedent for the agencies regarding litigation with competing interests. Additionally, the EEOC filed an opposition to DFEH’s objection, criticizing DFEH’s handling of the case, motivations for objecting to the settlement, and for lacking “a legally cognizable interest”.[13] With two different viewpoints presented to the court, all eyes are on the upcoming settlement hearing. The outcome of the hearing could dictate future operations between DFEH and the EEOC, potentially impacting the existing work-sharing agreement and how the EEOC works in tandem with other state agencies. The EEOC settlement must be approved in the District Court for the Central District of California, and the hearing is set for December 13, 2021.[14]
[1] Maeve Allsup, Activision Blizzard Sued Over ‘Frat Boy’ Culture, Harassment, Bloomberg Law (Jul. 21, 2021, 10:59 p.m.), https://www.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberglawnews/daily-labor-report/X5SKLA4O000000?bna_news_filter=daily-labor-report#jcite.
[2] Jaclyn Diaz, Activision Blizzard Strikes an $18 Million Deal Over Its Workplace Harassment Lawsuit, NPR (Sept. 28, 2021, 2:10 a.m.), https://www.npr.org/2021/09/28/1041068091/activision-blizzard-strikes-an-18-million-deal-over-its-workplace-harassment-law.
[3] Maeve Allsup, Activision Bias Settlement Draws Challenge From California, Bloomberg Law (Oct. 7, 2021, 5:21 p.m.), https://www.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberglawnews/daily-labor-report/X7IL03FC000000?bna_news_filter=daily-labor-report#jcite.
[4] About DFEH, Department of Fair Employment and Housing, https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/aboutdfeh/.
[5] About the EEOC, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, https://www.eeoc.gov/youth/about-eeoc-2.
[6] Worksharing Agreement Between California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Department of Fair Employment and Housing (2019), https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2019/01/WorksharingAgreementFY2019WSA.pdf.
[7] Mitchell v. State Dept. of Public Health, 1 Cal. App. 5th 1000, 1000 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 2016).
[8] Matt Wales, California Files Objection to Recent Activision Blizzard Settlement, Says Will Cause ‘Irreparable Harm’ to Its Legal Proceedings, Eurogamer (Oct. 8, 2021), https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2021-10-08-california-files-objection-to-recent-activision-blizzard-settlement-says-will-cause-irreparable-harm-to-its-legal-proceedings.
[9] Coronel v. Sears Logistics Servs., 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1912, 6 (Cal. App. 4th 2014). Minor v. FedEx Office & Print Servs., 205 F. Supp. 3d 1081, 1083 (N.D. Cal. 2016).
[10] Matt Wales, California Files Objection to Recent Activision Blizzard Settlement, Says Will Cause ‘Irreparable Harm’ to Its Legal Proceedings, Eurogamer (Oct. 8, 2021), https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2021-10-08-california-files-objection-to-recent-activision-blizzard-settlement-says-will-cause-irreparable-harm-to-its-legal-proceedings.
[11] Id.
[12] Worksharing Agreement Between California Department of Fair Employment and Housing and The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Department of Fair Employment and Housing (2019), https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2019/01/WorksharingAgreementFY2019WSA.pdf.
[13] Vin Gurrieri, EEOC Says Calif. Is Wrong To Oppose $18M Activision Deal, Law360 (Oct. 12, 2021, 7:07 p.m.), https://www.law360.com/employment-authority/articles/1430199/eeoc-says-calif-is-wrong-to-oppose-18m-activision-deal.
[14] Maeve Allsup, Activision Bias Settlement Draws Challenge From California, Bloomberg Law (Oct. 7, 2021, 5:21 p.m.), https://www.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberglawnews/daily-labor-report/X7IL03FC000000?bna_news_filter=daily-labor-report#jcite.
