California counties are diverting Dispute Resolution Program Act (DRPA) funds to those who can afford protracted and costly litigation. The community-based dispute resolution programs for all persons of all ethnic, racial and socioeconomic backgrounds are being deprived of funds. The Legislature must change the qualification criteria to codify its original intent.
However, some of the counties have lost sight of the Legislature's intent and have misdirected the funds away from under funded community programs to the detriment of the diverse communities and the socio-economically challenged. Some counties have chosen instead to fund court-connected programs, particularly claims over $25,000 that can generally only be accessed by economically sufficient persons.
For example, Los Angeles County ignores the legislative intent by giving priority to unlimited jurisdiction civil claims (over $25,000) by providing free services indiscriminately to all comers provided they are already in the litigation system. The Los Angeles court connected program specifically discriminates against Small Claims and low value ‘limited jurisdiction' cases (under $25,000 cases), by giving them the least priority and fails altogether to provide services ‘on a sliding scale basis'. The violation of legislative intent could hardly be clearer. Los Angeles County specifically limits funding for Small Claims and ignores the statutory purpose of racial, ethnic or socioeconomic diversity. By diverting funds to already well-funded unlimited jurisdiction cases, the County circumvents the statutory purpose by failing adequately to provide funding to programs for Small Claims and limited jurisdiction cases that involve disputes "between neighbors, domestic disputes and consumer-merchant disputes,' as specified by legislative intent.
Thus, the programs intended by the legislature to benefit from the funds, namely community programs involving disputes that have not already entered the court system and similar court-connected programs involving socio-economically challenged persons involved in low value limited jurisdiction and Small Claims disputes, and Youth Peer Programs, are suffering because funds are being diverted to programs serving economically prosperous, who receive dispute resolution services free of charge while paying handsomely for all other aspects of their litigation.
An enumeration of specific matters that may be referred to government-funded programs will prevent misuse of funds and uphold the statutory purpose. Business and Professions Code section 467.2 outlining the county's eligibility requirements for funding should be revised as follows: (b) Provision of neutral person, reflective of the diversity of the community in which they serve, adequately trained in conflict resolution techniques as required by the rules……. (c) Provision of dispute resolution programs on a sliding scale fee-paying basis, and without cost to indigents, with respect to any disputes that have not yet entered the court system, and limited jurisdiction and small claims cases.
By incorporating the Legislative intent of diversity of community volunteers and enumerating the specific disputes that can be eligible for Dispute Resolution Funds, the Legislature will finally create what it originally envisioned: a funded community-based dispute resolution forum for all persons of all ethnic, racial and socioeconomic backgrounds.
And the Oscar for Best Movie Goes To--- Crash of Racial Stereotypes and Humanitarian Babel.
Last year we saw Crash running away with the Oscar, and was acclaimed for not only the best movie of the year, but for its exposure of race relations, bias and stereotypes in American society. Again this year, Hollywood, has by accident, created incredible teaching tools that can be used to raise our unconscious biases and stereotypes which can lead us to recognize unique, individual features of others.
Celebrating The MLK Holiday Without Cutting Into a Businesses' Operating Revenue
Employers face a dilemma, each year, on which holidays to give off to their employees. Many employers do not give Martin Luther King Jr. birthday as a holiday. They do not want to be seen as racist or close minded, but employers are concerned about making enough revenue in order to pay for their overhead. However, employers have a lot of options in solving this dilemma without cutting into their revenue.
The Watchful Eye Of An Employer Can Invade The Employee’s Privacy.
Employers can be liable for secretly placing a video camera in an employee‘s office, even if the employer does not view any of the video. An employer must control his watchful eye and use it in limited circumstances.
