Changes to Existing Law
SB63 — Establish protections for state employees who report improper governmental conduct and crime.
1 section modified+290-0
View:
§ 3-6
New Section+290
NEW SECTION added to Chapter 3-6
C: 33 A supervising state employee may not discharge, discriminate against, or take any other retaliatory action against a state employee because the state employee has, as a result of suspected criminal activity against the state, improper governmental conduct, or a conflict of interest: (1) Filed a complaint; (2) Instituted or caused to be instituted a proceeding; (3) Requested or participated in an audit; (4) Testified, or will testify, in a proceeding; or (5) Exercised any other right or obligation imposed by this chapter or any law of this state. A state employee who believes retaliation has occurred in violation of this section may, within two years after the first alleged retaliatory action occurs, file a complaint with the attorney general describing the retaliation. The attorney general may institute a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction alleging a violation of this section. The court may grant any appropriate relief, including an injunction to restrain continued violation of this section and reinstatement of the state employee's former position with back pay. In any action brought pursuant to this section, the attorney general must show, by a preponderance of evidence, that the exercise of any right protected by this section contributed to the alleged retaliatory action. Upon establishment of a prima facie case of retaliation, the supervising state employee alleged to have violated this section has the burden to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the state employee's exercise of a right protected by this section did not contribute to the alleged retaliatory action. It is a defense to any action brought pursuant to this section that the alleged retaliatory action was predicated upon grounds other than the state employee's exercise of a right protected by this section. 25