(a)

1. (1) For purposes of this section, “employee” means any person employed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

2. (2) For purposes of this section, “retaliation” means intentionally engaging in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, coercion, or similar acts against another employee who has done any of the following:

   1. (A) Has disclosed or is disclosing to any employee at a supervisory or managerial level, what the employee, in good faith, believes to be improper governmental activities.
   2. (B) Has cooperated or is cooperating with any investigation of improper governmental activities.
   3. (C) Has refused to obey an illegal order or directive.

(b)

1. (1) Upon receiving a complaint of retaliation from an employee against a member of management at the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the Inspector General shall commence an inquiry into the complaint and conduct a formal investigation where a legally cognizable cause of action is presented. All investigations conducted pursuant to this section shall be performed in accordance with Sections 6126.5 and 6127.3. The Inspector General may refer all other matters for investigation by the appropriate employing entity, subject to oversight by the Inspector General. In a case in which the employing entity declines to investigate the complaint, it shall, within 30 days of receipt of the referral by the Inspector General, notify the Inspector General of its decision. The Inspector General shall thereafter, conduct his or her own inquiry into the complaint. If, after reviewing the complaint, the Inspector General determines that a legally cognizable cause of action has not been presented by the complaint, the Inspector General shall thereafter notify the complaining employee and the State Personnel Board that a formal investigation is not warranted.

2. (2) When investigating a complaint, in determining whether retaliation has occurred, the Inspector General or the employing entity shall consider, among other things, whether any of the following either actually occurred or were threatened:

   1. (A) Unwarranted or unjustified staff changes.
   2. (B) Unwarranted or unjustified letters of reprimand or other disciplinary actions, or unsatisfactory evaluations.
   3. (C) Unwarranted or unjustified formal or informal investigations.
   4. (D) Engaging in acts, or encouraging or permitting other employees to engage in acts, that are unprofessional, or foster a hostile work environment.
   5. (E) Engaging in acts, or encouraging or permitting other employees to engage in acts, that are contrary to the rules, regulations, or policies of the workplace.

3. (3) In a case in which the complaining employee has also filed a retaliation complaint with the State Personnel Board pursuant to Sections 8547.8 and 19683 of the Government Code, the State Personnel Board shall have the discretion to toll any investigation, hearing, or other proceeding that would otherwise be conducted by the State Personnel Board in response to that complaint, pending either the completion of the Inspector General’s or the employing entity’s investigation, or until the complaint is rejected or otherwise dismissed by the Inspector General or the employing entity. An employee, however, may not be required to first file a retaliation complaint with the Inspector General prior to filing a complaint with the State Personnel Board.

   1. (A) In a case in which the complaining employee has filed a retaliation complaint with the Inspector General but not with the State Personnel Board, the limitation period for filing a retaliation complaint with the State Personnel Board shall be tolled until the time the Inspector General or the employing entity either issues its report to the State Personnel Board, or until the complaint is rejected or otherwise dismissed by the Inspector General or the employing entity.
   2. (B) In order to facilitate coordination of efforts between the Inspector General and the State Personnel Board, the Inspector General shall notify the State Personnel Board of the identity of any employee who has filed a retaliation complaint with the Inspector General, and the State Personnel Board shall notify the Inspector General of the identity of any employee who has filed a retaliation complaint with the State Personnel Board.

(c)

1. (1) In a case in which the Inspector General determines, as a result of his or her own investigation, that an employee has been subjected to acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, or similar acts in violation of this section, the Inspector General shall provide a copy of the report, together with all other underlying materials the Inspector General determines to be relevant, to the appropriate director or chair who shall take appropriate corrective action. In a case in which the Inspector General determines, based on an independent review of the investigation conducted by the employing entity, that an employee has been subjected to acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, or similar acts in violation of this section, the Inspector General shall submit a written recommendation to the appropriate director or chair who shall take appropriate corrective action. If the hiring authority initiates disciplinary action as defined in Section 19570 of the Government Code, it shall provide the subject with all materials required by law.
2. (2) Any employee at any rank and file, supervisory, or managerial level, who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, coercion, or similar acts against another employee, pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a), shall be disciplined by the employing entity by adverse action as provided in Section 19572 of the Government Code. The disciplinary action shall require, at a minimum, a suspension for not less than 30 days without pay, except in a case in which the employing entity determines that a lesser penalty is warranted. In that case, the employing entity shall, within 30 days of receipt of the report, provide written justification for that decision to the Inspector General. The employing entity shall also, within 30 days of receipt of the written report, notify the Inspector General in writing as to what steps, if any, it has taken to remedy the retaliatory conduct found to have been committed by any of its employees.

(d)

1. (1) In an instance in which the appropriate director or chair declines to take adverse action against any employee found by the Inspector General to have engaged in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, or similar acts in violation of this section, the director or chair shall notify the Inspector General of that fact in writing within 30 days of receipt of the report from the Inspector General, and shall notify the Inspector General of the specific reasons why the director or chair declined to invoke adverse action proceedings against the employee.
2. (2) The Inspector General shall, thereafter, with the written consent of the complaining employee, forward an unredacted copy of the report, together with all other underlying materials the Inspector General deems to be relevant, to the State Personnel Board so that the complaining employee can request leave to file charges against the employee found to have engaged in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, or similar acts, in accordance with the provisions of Section 19583.5 of the Government Code. If the State Personnel Board accepts the complaint, the board shall provide the charged and complaining parties with a copy of all relevant materials.
3. (3) In addition to all other penalties provided by law, including Section 8547.8 of the Government Code or any other penalties that the sanctioning authority may determine to be appropriate, any state employee at any rank and file, supervisory, or managerial level found by the State Personnel Board to have intentionally engaged in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats, or coercion shall be suspended for not less than 30 days without pay, and shall be liable in an action for damages brought against him or her by the injured party. If the State Personnel Board determines that a lesser period of suspension is warranted, the reasons for that determination must be justified in writing in the decision.