Earlier this month, California’s Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill that would have made the state the first in the US to explicitly ban discrimination based on caste.
Background. Caste is defined in Senate Bill 403, the bill under consideration by Newsom, as “an individual’s perceived position in a system of social stratification on the basis of inherited status.” It has existed for thousands of years across South Asia. India outlawed caste discrimination in 1948, although reports indicate that it’s still prevalent in the country.
In recent years, there have been claims of caste-based discrimination at Silicon Valley companies, including a lawsuit alleging that supervisors at Cisco harassed an employee belonging to the Dalit caste. In April, the California Civil Rights Department dismissed the case against the individual engineers, but the case against the company is ongoing, according to CBS News.
“When it comes to the allegations that have come forward in these tech companies, we hear about people asking these sorts of coded questions like, ‘Where is your family from? What did they do?’” Sonia Paul, a journalist specializing in caste, told WBUR.
Legislation. Earlier this year, Seattle became the first city in the US to ban caste discrimination. California’s State Senate passed similar legislation in May, but the bill, which was brought to the floor by civil rights advocates and Democratic Senator Aisha Wahab, was vetoed on October 8 by Governor Newsom, who called it “unnecessary”; opponents to the bill have said it could potentially cause discrimination against South Asian communities.
Quick-to-read HR news & insights
From recruiting and retention to company culture and the latest in HR tech, HR Brew delivers up-to-date industry news and tips to help HR pros stay nimble in today’s fast-changing business environment.
“In California, we believe everyone deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, no matter who they are, where they come from, who they love, or where they live,” Newsom said.
Reaction from advocates. The bill has been hotly debated by advocacy groups. Some feel the protections are vital to reducing a type of discrimination that is likely underreported.
“While it is heartbreaking to receive the Governor’s veto, it is not a reflection of the incredible democratic power that our communities showed. We did the impossible,” Thenmozhi Soundararajan, founder of civil rights organization Equality Labs, said following the veto.
However Nikhil Joshi, a labor and employment attorney and advisor at the Hindu American Foundation, an opponent of the bill, told HR Brew that the legislation would have focused solely on one nationality.
“The Governor vetoed it because it was akin to some of the old California laws in the 1800s, early 1900s that targeted the Japanese, Chinese, or other Asians,” he explained. “When you look at caste, and the way that it’s been framed by the individuals who are pushing for it—it’s typically a South Asian–related construct.”
Joshi also said that the law isn’t needed because equal opportunity laws protect people from being discriminated against based on ethnicity.
“That form of discrimination, if it’s even happening, is already covered by national origin ancestry categories that are better protected and proven by law.”