El discrimen en el empleo incluye ahora prejuicio contra personas por ser victimas
o ser percibidas como víctimas de violencia domestica, agresión sexual o acecho. La Ley 271 del 17 de diciembre de 2006 enmienda
la ley general de discrimen, la Núm. 100
de 30 de junio de 1959, para añadir la nueva causal a la larga lista de condiciones ya prohibidas (edad, sexo, color, matrimonio, origen nacional, y
otras). Lamentablemente,
la ley tiene ambigüedades, lagunas y le asigna al
patrono una serie de responsabilidades que no están claramente definidas. Obtenga copia de la ley presionando aquí Download ley-271-21-Dic-2006.pdf.
Ahora
violará la ley 100 “[t]odo patrono que despida,
suspenda o discrimine contra un empleado suyo en relación a su sueldo, salario,
jornal o compensación, términos, categorías, condiciones o privilegios de su
trabajo, o que deje de emplear o rehúse emplear o reemplear a una persona, o
limite o clasifique sus empleados en cualquier forma que tienda a privar a una
persona de oportunidades de empleo o que afecten su status como empleado, por
razón de. . . ser victima o ser percibida como
víctima de violencia domestica, agresión sexual o acecho del empleado o
solicitante de empleo …."
Además de prohibir el
discrimen, el legislador requiere que el patrono tome acción para proteger sus
empleados cuando hay un riesgo de violencia. Por ende el patrono
deberá “realizar los ajustes o acomodos razonables necesarios en el lugar de
trabajo para proteger a sus empleados de un posible agresor una vez este haya
sido avisado sobre la potencialidad de que ocurra una situación peligrosa. El
no hacerlo se presumirá como una conducta discriminatoria”.
El legislador no provee límites
o parámetros o descripción de lo que se supone que haga el patrono para cumplir con
el acomodo razonable; hasta donde llegar; que es suficiente y que no; o la
dificultad significativa (costos y logística) que puede conllevar este tipo de
acción. Tampoco la ley dispone sobre los deberes y responsabilidades de la victima. Es
decir en todo esto, a la victima no se le impone parámetros de conducta. Esto
complica el panorama pues recae en el patrono toda la responsabilidad de que
hacer para enfrentar un posible agresor. A parte que la soluciones pueden
ser distintas para la victima que para los demás empleados; incluso pueden estar
en conflicto.
Este enjambre de escenarios es un preámbulo para
múltiples demandas en daños y perjuicios si resulta que las decisiones tomadas
por el patrono no son acertadas -que si el patrono debió haber contratado un
guardia de seguridad, que si debió haber llamado a la policía en tal fecha, que
si debió haber hecho esto o lo otro.
Del ‘protocolo’ (Ley Núm. 217) nada se habla en la nueva
ley, a pesar de que la razón de su existir es para prevenir y atender la
violencia en el empleo. La ley del protocolo llegó como la carreta que va
frente a los bueyes. La legislatura debió
haber creado la Ley 271 primero que la 217 y luego incorporar el protocolo como
parte de sus requisitos; tal como lo hace la Ley Núm. 17 de Hostigamiento Sexual;
que requiere que el patrono tenga una política. Desafortunadamente tenemos dos
leyes íntimamente relacionadas y desconectadas de si mismas.
La inconsistencia y falta de integración entre la ley 217 y
la 271 demuestra que éstas se aprobaron a la ligera, sin pensarse adecuadamente; me
imagino que para cumplir con alguna agenda. El legislador debió haber integrado ambas leyes y dar más claridad y
dirección; claro esto implicaba trabajo serio y pensado. Ahora serán las empresas que pagarán las consecuencias.
A parte del riesgo de
violencia en el empleo, el otro problema que surge en el trabajo es el
ausentismo y la falta de productividad. La ley desafortunadamente guarda silencio sobre este aspecto. La dificultad está en que el patrono tiene el
derecho a exigir que el empleado sea puntual y venga a trabajar
regularmente.
Aunque el empleado en Puerto Rico tiene acceso a múltiples licencias, puede ocurrir una situación en la cual el derecho del patrono a minimizar el ausentismo choque con la necesidad
de la empleada de tomar tiempo laborable para manejar algún asunto relacionado a la violencia que sufre. Ejemplos incluyen, una cita con un psicólogo, comparecer al tribunal, atenderse con un médico, o consultar con su abogado.
Al atender sus asuntos, la victima pudiese estar violando las reglas de puntualidad y/o ausentismo de su patrono. No necesariamente sería un acto
discriminatorio disciplinar a la empleada por violación a estas reglas pues se trataría de infracciones a políticas neutrales aplicadas a todos por igual. Realmente estos son casos donde el patrono debería brindar algún tipo de acomodo- haciendo excepciones o modificaciones a sus reglas; algo que no menciona la ley.
La ley cita varias disposiciones del Código Laboral de California en su Exposición de Motivos. Expresa la ley que California es una de las
“jurisdicciones en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica [que] cuenta con
legislación de protección en contra del discrimen en el trabajo por ser víctima
o ser percibida como víctima de violencia doméstica, agresión sexual o acecho”.
La realidad es que las leyes de California que citan los legisladores en nada se asemejan a lo
aprobado en Puerto Rico.
En California la
legislación tiene otro enfoque. Allá los patronos no corren con la
responsabilidad de brindarle protección a la victima o darle acomodo razonable
ilimitado. Tampoco se habla de personas ‘percibidas’ como victimas. La
ley se concentra en proteger a empleados que toman licencias para atender
asuntos relacionados a violencia domestica o agresión sexual; pero le imponen a
estos ciertos requisitos y responsabilidades. Me hace mucho sentido el enfoque de la ley porque así se reparten responsabilidades y; cada parte conoce cuales son, particularmente con relación al ausentismo que sería posiblemente el área mas conflictiva entre el patrono y el empleado. Desafortunadamente la ley local no aborda este asunto. La ley de California también protege al pequeño comerciante
creando distinciones dependiendo del tamaño de la nómina; algo que el legislador local rara
vez se contempla.
Finalmente, la ley nueva ley habla de
“discriminar por ser percibida como víctima . . . .”. Veo bien
lejano un escenario donde un patrono discrimine contra una persona
porque cree que es victima de violencia domestica…No entiendo el propósito de
incluir esta frase. Si el propósito es
proteger a las victimas de violencia, para que proteger a las que no son
victimas solo porque alguien cree que son victimas. No veo la necesidad de complicar
más la ley con una verborrea ambigua que solo puede traer mas litigio a los
tribunales.
Aquí les incluyo las
leyes de California para su información:
California Labor Code Sec.
230
(a) An employer may not
discharge or in any manner discriminate against an employee for taking
time off to serve as required by law on an inquest jury or trial jury, if the
employee, prior to taking the time off, gives reasonable notice to the employer
that he or she is required to serve.
(b) An employer may not discharge or in any manner discriminate or retaliate
against an employee, including, but not limited to, an employee who is a victim
of a crime, for taking time off to appear in court to comply with a subpoena or
other court order as a witness in any judicial proceeding.
(c) An employer may not discharge or in any manner discriminate or retaliate
against an employee who is a victim of domestic violence or a victim of sexual
assault for taking time off from work to obtain or attempt to obtain any relief,
including, but not limited to, a temporary restraining order, restraining
order, or other injunctive relief, to help ensure the health, safety, or
welfare of the victim or his or her child.
(d) (1) As a condition of taking time off for a purpose set forth in
subdivision (c), the employee shall give the employer reasonable advance notice
of the employee's intention to take time off, unless the advance notice is not
feasible.
(2) When an unscheduled absence occurs, the employer shall not take any
action against the employee if the employee, within a reasonable time after the
absence, provides a certification to the employer. Certification shall be
sufficient in the form of any of the following:
(A) A police report indicating that the employee was a victim of domestic
violence or sexual assault.
(B) A court order protecting or separating the employee from the perpetrator
of an act of domestic violence or sexual assault, or other evidence from the
court or prosecuting attorney that the employee has appeared in court.
(C) Documentation from a medical professional, domestic violence advocate or
advocate for victims of sexual assault, health care provider, or counselor that
the employee was undergoing treatment for physical or mental injuries or abuse
resulting in victimization from an act of domestic violence or sexual assault.
(3) To the extent allowed by law, the employer shall maintain the
confidentiality of any employee requesting leave under subdivision (c).
(e) Any employee who is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted,
suspended, or in any other manner discriminated or retaliated against in the
terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer because the employee
has taken time off for a purpose set forth in subdivision (a), (b), or (c)
shall be entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and work
benefits caused by the acts of the employer. Any employer who willfully refuses
to rehire, promote, or otherwise restore an employee or former employee who has
been determined to be eligible for rehiring or promotion by a grievance
procedure or hearing authorized by law is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(f) (1) Any employee who is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted,
suspended, or in any other manner discriminated or retaliated against in the
terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer because the employee
has exercised his or her rights as set forth in subdivision (a), (b), or (c)
may file a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement of the
Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Section 98.7.
(2) Notwithstanding any time limitation in Section 98.7, an employee filing
a complaint with the division based upon a violation of subdivision (c) shall
have one year from the date of occurrence of the violation to file his or her
complaint.
(g) An employee may use vacation, personal leave, or compensatory time off
that is otherwise available to the employee under the applicable terms of
employment, unless otherwise provided by a collective bargaining agreement, for
time taken off for a purpose specified in subdivision (a), (b), or (c). The
entitlement of any employee under this section shall not be diminished by any
collective bargaining agreement term or condition.
(h) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Domestic violence" means any of the types of abuse set forth
in Section 6211 of the Family Code, as amended.
(2) "Sexual assault" means any of the crimes set forth in Section
261, 261.5, 262, 265, 266, 266a, 266b, 266c, 266g, 266j, 267, 269, 273.4, 285,
286, 288, 288a, 288.5, 289, or 311.4 of the Penal Code, as amended.
California Labor Code Sec. 230.1
(a) In addition to the requirements and prohibitions imposed on employees
pursuant to Section 230, an employer with 25 or more employees may not
discharge or in any manner discriminate or retaliate against an employee who is
a victim of domestic violence or a victim of sexual assault for taking time off
from work to attend to any of the following:
(1) To seek medical attention for injuries caused by domestic violence or
sexual assault.
(2) To obtain services from a domestic violence shelter, program, or rape
crisis center as a result of domestic violence or sexual assault.
(3) To obtain psychological counseling related to an experience of domestic
violence or sexual assault.
(4) To participate in safety planning and take other actions to increase
safety from future domestic violence or sexual assault, including temporary or
permanent relocation.
(b) (1) As a condition of taking time off for a purpose set forth in
subdivision (a), the employee shall give the employer reasonable advance notice
of the employee's intention to take time off, unless the advance notice is not
feasible.
(2) When an unscheduled absence occurs, the employer may not take any action
against the employee if the employee, within a reasonable time after the
absence, provides a certification to the employer. Certification shall be
sufficient in the form of any of the following:
(A) A police report indicating that the employee was a victim of domestic
violence or sexual assault.
(B) A court order protecting or separating the employee from the perpetrator
of an act of domestic violence or sexual assault, or other evidence from the
court or prosecuting attorney that the employee appeared in court.
(C) Documentation from a medical professional, domestic violence advocate or
advocate for victims of sexual assault, health care provider, or counselor that
the employee was undergoing treatment for physical or mental injuries or abuse
resulting in victimization from an act of domestic violence or sexual assault.
(3) To the extent allowed by law, employers shall maintain the
confidentiality of any employee requesting leave under subdivision (a).
(c) Any employee who is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted,
suspended, or in any other manner discriminated or retaliated against in the
terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer because the employee
has taken time off for a purpose set forth in subdivision (a) is entitled to
reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages and work benefits caused by the
acts of the employer. Any employer who willfully refuses to rehire, promote, or
otherwise restore an employee or former employee who has been determined to be
eligible for rehiring or promotion by a grievance procedure or hearing
authorized by law is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(d) (1) Any employee who is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted,
suspended, or in any other manner discriminated or retaliated against in the
terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer because the employee
has exercised his or her rights as set forth in subdivision (a) may file a
complaint with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement of the Department of
Industrial Relations pursuant to Section 98.7.
(2) Notwithstanding any time limitation in Section 98.7, an employee filing
a complaint with the division based upon a violation of subdivision (a) has one
year from the date of occurrence of the violation to file his or her complaint.
(e) An employee may use vacation, personal leave, or compensatory time off
that is otherwise available to the employee under the applicable terms of
employment, unless otherwise provided by a collective bargaining agreement, for
time taken off for a purpose specified in subdivision (a). The entitlement of
any employee under this section may not be diminished by any collective
bargaining agreement term or condition.
(f) This section does not create a right for an employee to take unpaid
leave that exceeds the unpaid leave time allowed under, or is in addition to
the unpaid leave time permitted by, the federal Family and Medical Leave Act of
1993 (29 U.S.C. Sec. 2601 et seq.).
(g) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Domestic violence" means any of the types of abuse set forth
in Section 6211 of the Family Code, as amended.
(2) "Sexual assault" means any of the crimes set forth in Section
261, 261.5, 262, 265, 266, 266a, 266b, 266c, 266g, 266j, 267, 269, 273.4, 285,
286, 288, 288a, 288.5, 289, or 311.4 of the Penal Code, as amended.
