Opinion ID: 1364986
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Old Law and the New

Text: In point of fact, the current and former law are remarkably consistent. Indeed, the definition of physical disability adopted by the Legislature in 1992 has been effectively controlling FEHA claims in California since 1980. In that year, the Fair Employment and Housing Commission first adopted a regulation defining handicapped individual in terms substantially similar to the recent amendment. That regulation, which has not been significantly amended, describes such an individual as one who (1) Has a physical handicap which substantially limits one or more major life activities ; [¶] (2) Has a record of such a physical handicap; or [¶] (3) Is regarded as having such a physical handicap. (See now Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 7293.6, subd. (i).) In addition, the regulation interprets impairment of physical ability due to loss of function as Any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological, musculoskeletal, special sense organs, respiratory, including speech organs, cardiovascular, reproductive, digestive, genitourinary, hemic and lymphatic, skin and endocrine. (See now Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 7293.6, subd. (d), italics added.) The obvious similarity between the 1980 regulation and the 1992 statutory amendment is not coincidental. Both derive from the same source, the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.) (Rehabilitation Act), which prohibits handicap discrimination by federal contractors and recipients of federal assistance. [10] Over the last two decades, many states have enacted statutes or, as in California, regulations which track the federal statute. (See O'Connor, Defining Handicap for Purposes of Employment Discrimination (1988) 30 Ariz. L.Rev. 633, 649-650 [hereafter O'Connor].) The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.) (ADA), which substantially broadens the scope of federal protection of the disabled, also adopts the Rehabilitation Act definition of handicap (42 U.S.C. § 12102; 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(g) (1992)). The 1992 amendment to section 12926 is modeled, in turn, on the ADA. (§ 12926, subd. (k).) The result is that our statute has finally caught up with its implementing regulation; the new definition of disability in section 12926, subdivision (k), and the long-standing interpretation of handicap in the California Code of Regulations (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 7293.6) are in harmony. Each requires an actual or perceived physiological disorder, disease, condition, cosmetic disfigurement or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the body's major systems and substantially limiting one or more major life activities. The case law also reveals a general consistency between the current and former versions of section 12926. The regulation, which is now more than a dozen years old, has regularly informed the courts' decisions. Indeed, every reported decision to date has either cited, or is consistent with, the regulatory provision. In Pickrel v. General Telephone Co. (1988) 205 Cal. App.3d 1058, 1061 [252 Cal. Rptr. 878], for example, the court relied on the regulation in holding that the plaintiff's back injury  a physiological disorder affecting the musculoskeletal system  satisfied the definition of physical handicap. In County of Fresno v. Fair Employment & Housing Com. (1991) 226 Cal. App.3d 1541, 1549 [277 Cal. Rptr. 557], the court noted that the plaintiffs' physical condition, an extreme sensitivity to smoke, constituted a physiological disorder affecting the respiratory system and therefore qualified as a physical handicap under the FEHA. (See also Raytheon Co. v. Fair Employment & Housing Com. (1989) 212 Cal. App.3d 1242 [261 Cal. Rptr. 197] [acquired immune deficiency syndrome is the result of a virus affecting the human immune system and therefore constitutes a physical handicap under FEHA].) Even the relatively broad holding in American National, supra, 32 Cal.3d 603, was informed and limited by the fact that the plaintiff alleged a physiological disorder (high blood pressure) affecting the cardiovascular system and therefore fit neatly within the regulatory requirements. (1) Thus, it is a relatively simple matter to harmonize the current and former versions of section 12926. Under both, the touchstone of a qualifying handicap or disability is an actual or perceived physiological disorder which affects a major body system and limits the individual's ability to participate in one or more major life activities.