A key witness agrees to talk, then disappears. Emails go unanswered. A promised list of available times never arrives. Meanwhile, the investigation clock keeps running, and the parties wait for an answer.
A nonresponsive witness can complicate an investigation, but it does not automatically bring the process to a stop. The investigator’s job is to
Most employers know the value of an exit interview. When an employee resigns, agencies often ask why they are leaving and what could have been done differently. The problem, of course, is that by the time an exit interview takes place, the employee has already decided to move on.
What if agencies asked those questions
For agencies operating hospitals, clinics, behavioral health programs, correctional health programs, or other essential public health services, picketing and strike activity by their employees can raise immediate operational, legal, and public-facing concerns. In these settings, the urgent question is how the agency will maintain critical services, protect patients and the public, and respond lawfully and
Artificial intelligence (“AI”) tools are increasingly being marketed as a way to streamline workplace investigations: summarizing evidence, generating interview outlines, comparing witness statements, or even “detecting inconsistencies” in testimony. While these tools may appear to help investigators move faster, public employers should approach AI-assisted investigations with caution. California public agencies have unique obligations to ensure
With the enactment of SB 1137, California has explicitly recognized “intersectionality” under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and related statutes: or the idea that in certain instances, discrimination is not based solely on one trait, but rather based on the combination of two or more protected characteristics. Intersectionality is an analytical framework