doesn't say anything about how to deal with the rest pending disposition and when dealing with an employee who's guilty or innocence regarding job related conduct it's i thought your employer have to be allowed to exercise reasonable business judgment while the statute doesn't prohibit you for example federal express an employer from conducting your own investigation and then based on what you find underlying what it was and taking whatever disciplinary actions are appropriate under the person doing if it's job related it's a driver and the driver was intoxicated or something like that then you're then you're home free it simply says you can't use the simple fact of an arrest by itself just really do your own investigation doesn't actually was the case that one kind of stands for two things then you could say they don't both make sense but here's what it stands for as i understand it number one that this section prohibits disciplinary action based on a misconduct so that's just that you just can't use the record itself that you can conduct your own investigation as i said earlier i mean is that one of your arguments in this case that you discipline of based on what you found out not just on the arrest record alon an investigation or much of one it was just that perception that it negatively impugned their business and that it was for their customers to have people working for them on an airline trafficking in cocaine and damages the motion for summary judgment raise this issue you claim in a motion for summary judgment that your reasons for disciplining mr pugh town came from your independent investigation not just from the fact that he had been arrested yet and you said that in your moving papers yes and that included the fact that we couldn't get much information so it was our investigation which basically didn't get and suggested did you tell the court there was a genuine issue of material fact on on what was the predicate for your discipline whether it was just the arrest and result of the conviction or whether it was on other information now sputum the supervisor testified that's why he suspended him and he would only let him drive once the arrest was cleared up there's no question about that california labor code prohibits that kind of conduct and this is a case that's on all fours pittman whether it's not not is the only case that interprets the language of the labor code let's say is that they found out  based on because it's sex abuse no i don't think an employer can say that even though the statute says you can't take action because of an arrest employers can't say well if it's an arrest for something job related then we can take action that's not what the statute sa analysis and after his detention and he told friends actually have a zero blood alcohol so there was no evidence whatsoever that they either had or relied on in deciding to suspend him other than suspend them i think that would be a different situation yes if you read and if the headlines in the newspapers a daycare worker arrested for child abuse and you employ this person can you  discipline on the basis that you read it in the newspaper oh i don't think so and if it's based on the arrest no not under that statute i think the employee has an obligation under california law to ask the employee about the circumstances so it takes the i'm not talking to my lawyer for me on talk of the new employers in a difficult situation which is opposite be addressed by the legislature not part of the court in this case anything else nothing else thanks counsel thank you want to because that's a protection of the public safety not to make great that's why we have fairly careful bail standards we don't just throw people in jail because they've been arrested but in terms of if there's an issue of public actually i you know i thought about that your honor in terms of making that request i think there's a procedure to make that request i think that's not a bad idea i didn't do it because i heard that we don't last do anything every