A motion for a preliminary injunction to require a hearing with aid continuing is pending, with the defendant's response due on November 1. The court in this case has issued a temporary restraining order restoring general assistance benefits to a nineteen year old high school student whose benefits had been discontinued because he refused a workfare assignment which would have required him to drop out of school. The county was therefore held the employer for the purpose worker's compensation. Interestingly, the court did not question whether the workfare workers were employees. This case challenges the New York State Labor Commissioner's refusal to permit workfare workers to have a representative of their choosing present at inspections resulting from health and safety complaints made by the workers.
Petitioners make claims under the state and federal constitutions and state labor law.
Those identified as CD by the questionnaire were required to participate in an ongoing treatment program. Later the requirement was changed to require referral for a further individualized assessment. Plaintiffs are individuals who were not CD when they took the screening test but based on the results were treated as such and required to cooperate with program requirements for chemically dependent persons. They claimed that the screening test violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, federal Due Process requirements, privacy guarantees of the California Constitution, and state statutes. The court concluded that the test violates federal regulations implementing the ADA, after rejecting a claim that the test violates the ADA itself.