Can Employees Be Disciplined for Filing a False Harassment
Claim?
What happens when one of your employees fabricates a sexual
harassment claim? A California appellate court recently ruled
that an employee who fabricates a sexual harassment claim can
be disciplined. Though certain circumstances may warrant
disciplinary action, proceed with caution because such discipline
could result in a retaliation claim. Joaquin v. City of Los Angeles,
202 Cal.App.4th 1207 (2012)
Independent Review Found Fabricated Claim
The abbreviated facts:

Richard Joaquin, a Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD)
police officer, is told by his supervisor, Sergeant Sands,
that he might be disciplined for leaving a shift early.

Right after learning this news, Joaquin charges his
sergeant with same-sex harassment claiming that Sands
made sexually suggestive comments to him.

The LAPD’s Internal Affairs Group conducts an
investigation and determines the harassment allegations
are unfounded.

In turn, Sands complains that Joaquin filed a false
complaint against him and gave false information during an
official investigation.

Various internal investigations lead the LAPD to fire
Joaquin for a false accusation of sexual harassment made
to avoid disciplinary action. The decision is upheld during a
Board of Rights Hearing – a formal proceeding by two
sworn officers and one civilian.

Joaquin sues the LAPD, alleging that his termination
happened in retaliation for his sexual harassment
complaint. The LAPD argues that he is terminated for
fabricating the claim.
The question: Can Joaquin be disciplined if the LAPD concludes
that he fabricated a claim of sexual harassment? Or is his
complaint insulated from discipline under anti-retaliation laws
even when the LAPD determines the complaint was fabricated?
A jury believed Joaquin’s termination was retaliatory and
awarded him more than $2 million for lost wages and emotional
distress.
Court Finds Termination Decision Lawful
The Court of Appeal reversed the jury’s award and ruled in favor
of the LAPD. Per the court, if an employee makes false charges
of harassment, an employer who terminates that employee
because of the false charges has not engaged in retaliation.
Employers are forbidden from discriminating against an
employee who participates in discrimination or harassment
investigations. But the employee is not insulated from being
disciplined for conduct that, if it occurred outside an
investigation, would warrant termination or other discipline.
“For it cannot be true that a plaintiff can file false charges, lie to
an investigator, and possibly defame co-employees, without
suffering repercussions simply because the investigation was
about sexual harassment,” the court stated. An employer may
discipline for false charges of harassment under “appropriate
circumstances.”
“The anti-discrimination laws were not designed to arm
employees with a tactical coercive weapon under which
employees can make baseless claims simply to advance their
own retaliatory motives and strategies,” the court said.
But if the stated reason for discipline, fabricated charges, is
really a pretext for improper retaliatory intent, disciplining the
employee for his or her complaint will clearly be unlawful. After
reviewing the evidence, the court was unable to find that the
LAPD’s decision to terminate was motivated by retaliatory intent.
The LAPD’s Internal Affairs Group conducted an independent
and thorough investigation, there was no evidence of bias, the
conclusion was reasoned, and an independent review board also
heard from witnesses and provided a full hearing on the
termination decision.
Implications
The court’s ruling allows employers to discipline for false claims
and is consistent with some federal decisions allowing the same.
But employers should be wary about taking such action except in
the most blatant of instances and, even then, only with the
advice of counsel. It is likely that such action will result in the
employee claiming retaliation. Unless you have strong evidence
of fabrication, you are in for a long litigious road.
Though the LAPD was ultimately vindicated by the court in this
case, it wasn’t until after five years passed and the LAPD was
dragged through administrative proceedings and a jury trial.
Best Practices:

Investigate all claims of harassment and discrimination. Be
thorough and follow up on all information relevant to the
claim.

Document the investigation.

Use an independent, unbiased investigator. Often an
outside investigator is your best option, especially if
concerns arise that the employee has created a blatant
fabrication with the intent to avoid disciplinary action.

Only consider disciplinary action in those exceptional
circumstances where the complaint was explicitly false and
motivated by intent to harm the other employee or avoid
disciplinary action and only after seeking advice of counsel.