Legislative Roundup: New employment laws effective 2025

---

It’s that time of year again – following the Legislature’s adjournment, typically on August 31, the California Governor has until September 30 to sign or veto legislation in his/her possession, or it becomes law without being signed.  Governor Newsom has now signed some key pieces of employment legislation of interest to employers, which all take effect January 1, 2025, except where noted.  Let’s take a look at these bills in detail; we provide a recommendation for employers, where applicable:

Senate Bill 1137 (Smallwood-Cuevas):

• Summary: clarifies that the Unruh Civil Rights Act, the provisions of the Education Code prohibiting discrimination in public education, and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) prohibit discrimination on the basis not just of individual protected traits, but also on the basis of the combination of two or more protected traits.

• Background: California’s civil rights laws protect against discrimination against others in housing, employment, education, and public accommodations on the basis of a range of characteristics, including race, sex and gender, religion, and sexual orientation. These statutes do not, however, expressly state that discrimination on the basis of prejudices that arise from a combination of multiple protected characteristics. The interplay between multiple protected characteristics is frequently referred to as “intersectionality,” a term coined and popularized by legal scholar Professor Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw. Although it seems obvious that the civil rights laws already extend to discrimination on the basis of a combination of protected characteristics—there is no articulable rationale for allowing discrimination on the basis of multiple characteristics under the law, when each characteristic on its own is protected—the sponsors of the bill report that some courts have resisted recognizing the possibility of intersectional discrimination claims. This bill is intended to eliminate any lingering ambiguity by clarifying that the civil rights laws protect against discrimination on the basis of the combination between two or more protected characteristics.

• According to the author: Statewide legislation specifically acknowledging and addressing the existence of intersectional discrimination claims is not only necessary, but overdue. California has long been at the forefront of defining and redressing conditions that manifest unjust outcomes for its citizens, in the workplace and beyond. Our laws need to reflect best practices, empirical data, and comprehensive solutions to longstanding and multidimensional problems. SB 1137 accomplishes this by clarifying existing law to specifically recognize discrimination based on more than one protected class—such as both race and gender, gender and age, or gender and disability—under California's anti-discrimination laws. This change will allow plaintiffs who have experienced overlapping forms of discrimination to more successfully pursue justice and ensure that the application of our anti-discrimination laws is consistent with legislative intent.

Assembly Bill 2499 (Schiavo):

• Summary: expands the list of crimes for which employees are entitled to take time off and allows employees to take time off to help family members, as defined, who are the victims of the specified crimes for specified purposes.
• According to the author: AB 2499 will address shortcomings in the state’s current approach to leave and workplace protections for victims and survivors of violence, by ensuring survivors and their loved ones the ability to take necessary time off for specific reasons related to safety and recovery. The bill will recognize additional common reasons survivors need to take unpaid time off from work, allow family members of survivors to take necessary unpaid time off to support their loved ones in achieving safety and recovery, allow family members to use their pre-existing paid sick days for covered purposes, and streamline the process through which survivors can learn about and assert their rights. This bill will also permit reasonable safety-related accommodations for survivors of more forms of violence - consistent with the types of violent victimization experiences currently included in leave protections - and include family members in those protections.
• Recommendation: employers should update their employee handbooks to reflect these changes

Assembly Bill 2123 (Papan):

• Summary: This bill sunsets provisions in law authorizing an employer to require employees to take two weeks of vacation leave before accessing their benefits under California’s Paid Family Leave (PFL) program.

• Need for the measure: according to the author, “Under current law, employers can require an employee to use up to two weeks of accrued vacation leave before they can access PFL benefits. This requirement contradicts the purpose of the program and impedes workers from obtaining the benefits that they are entitled to. Vacation time is intended for personal time off and accrual policies vary across industries and employers, while PFL is intended to support workers unable to work because they are bonding or caregiving. Moreover, workers who have already paid for PFL should be able to receive the benefit as soon as they become eligible, not when their employer allows them to. Assembly Bill (AB) 2123 will remove an unnecessary barrier for individuals seeking to access their paid family benefits. This will allow individuals to take care of their loved ones without fear of losing their vacation time.”

• Recommendation: employee handbook update

Senate Bill 1100 (Portantino):

• Summary: this bill prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of an individual’s lack of a driver’s license or car ownership, with exceptions, as specified

• According to the author: "In California, it is common for employers to request a driver's license as part of the application process for housing and employment. This practice poses significant barriers for certain segments of the population, including young adults, the elderly, immigrants, individuals with disabilities, and those who choose not to drive due to environmental concerns or personal preferences. Furthermore, this practice disproportionately affects low-income individuals and communities of color, who may have less access to personal transportation. The result is a systemic exclusion from essential services and opportunities, exacerbating social inequities and limiting economic mobility." Regarding how the bill promotes equity solutions and maximizes benefits for underserved and marginalized communities, the author adds that "The bill removes unnecessary barriers to employment and supports equal access to economic stability for all community members. By prohibiting employers from requiring a driver's license unless it is essential for the job, the bill addresses a common hurdle faced by individuals who cannot afford a vehicle, have disabilities preventing them from driving, or who do not have a driver's license for various reasons."
• Recommendation: employers should review their hiring criteria and processes to reflect the changes made in SB 1100

Senate Bill 1350 (Durazo):

• Summary: this bill, beginning on July 1, 2025, removes the household domestic service exemption from the definition of “employment” for purposes of California’s Occupational Safety and Health Act’s health and safety protections to certain domestic workers whose service is not publicly funded, do not work in family daycare homes, and are not privately employed by individuals in their own residences, as specified.
• Need for this bill: Implementing regulations for the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 and California’s Labor Code have conflicting provisions when it comes to household domestic service employees and their right to protections under OSHA. California’s Labor Code excludes household domestic service from all provisions and protections available under OSHA while the federal regulations appear to only exempt individuals who, in their own residences, privately employ persons for these purposes. This means that, at the federal level, domestic workers hired through a service company or agency are not exempt from federal OSHA regulations and are therefore protected under its provisions. California law exempts all household domestic service workers. This bill would align California’s OSHA definitions with those of the federal government, thereby, extending protections under OSHA to agency-based domestic workers while excluding domestic workers hired by individuals in their private homes, those that are working under publicly funded programs, and those working in family daycare homes.

Senate Bill 399 (Wahab) – Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act:

• Summary: this bill enacts the California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act to prohibit an employer from subjecting, or threatening to subject, an employee to discharge, discrimination, retaliation because the employee declines to attend an employer-sponsored meeting or affirmatively declines to participate in, receive, or listen to any communications with the employer or its agents or representatives, the purpose of which is to communicate the employer’s opinion about religious or political matters.
• According to the author: "We live in highly polarized times where political discussions occur all too frequently in the workplace. No worker should be subject to forced indoctrination by their employer on politics, religion, or for exercising their protected rights on the job. It is important that workers of all religions and political perspectives are free to go to work without feeling coerced or enduring a hostile work environment. [This bill] prohibits employers from engaging in coercive conduct that requires workers to attend meetings on their views on political matters, religious matters, or constitutionally protected rights. This bill does not infringe on free speech rights and employers are still free to discuss their religious, political, and anti-union views with workers; so long as they do not coerce or force them to listen against their will." The author further states that "[This bill] promotes workers' rights, especially those of marginalized communities, by protecting their right to advocate for themselves and opt out of conversations about politics or religion that have nothing to do with their ability to properly execute their job. By giving people the choice to listen to the political or religious views of their employer, we are ensuring that the most marginalized workers are not taken advantage of by their employers."
• Recommendation: employers should review their workplace meeting procedures to align with the prohibitions of SB 399

Senate Bill 988 (Wiener) – Freelance Worker Protection Act:

• Summary: this bill establishes the Freelance Worker Protection Act to impose minimum requirements relating to contracts between a hiring party and a freelance worker, as defined. Among other things, the Act requires a hiring entity to 1) provide a written contract to the freelance worker; 2) pay a freelance worker the compensation specified by such contract, as provided; and 3) authorizes an aggrieved freelance worker or a public prosecutor to bring a civil action to enforce these provisions.
• Background: the employer-employee relationship is at the core of the rights and obligations found within Labor Code. Being classified as an employee is essential to trigger most of the employer mandates and worker protections found within existing law. California’s wage and hour laws (e.g., minimum wage, overtime, meal periods and rest breaks, workers’ compensation etc.), workplace safety laws, and retaliation laws protect employees, but not independent contractors. Additionally, employees can go to state agencies such as the Labor Commissioner’s office to seek enforcement of these laws, whereas independent contractors must resolve their disputes or enforce their rights under their contracts through other means. Freelance workers contribute essential services to our homes and businesses and are one of the fastest growing sectors of the workforce. Because freelance workers are not employees but independent contractors, they typically do not receive the same protections against wage theft. Efforts to enact laws protecting freelance workers have begun to pass in several states and localities.

• Need for this bill: according to the author, “Senate Bill 988 will protect freelancers from exploitation by providing them with the basic protections and ensuring prompt payment. Freelance workers frequently report experiencing months of late or non-payment, which is a significant financial hardship. Most freelance workers don’t have a written contract and are often living paycheck-to-paycheck. Just like any other type of worker, they deserve to be compensated fairly for their work and to have recourse if they’re mistreated.”

Assembly Bill 2975 (Gipson):

• Summary: this bill (1) requires the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (Standards Board) by March 1, 2027, to amend the existing workplace violence prevention in health care standards to require licensed hospitals to implement a weapons detection screening policy that includes the use of weapons detection devices that automatically screen a person’s body at specified entrances; and (2) requires the hospitals to adopt related policies, including staffing, training, and signage requirements, as specified.

• Need for the bill: according to the author: “Healthcare workers face a disproportionately high rate of workplace violence compared to other industries. One study suggests healthcare workers are five times more likely to sustain a workplace violence injury than other professions. In 2018, 73% of all nonfatal workplace violence-related injuries involved healthcare workers. There is growing attention on workplace violence in healthcare settings as it exacerbates the stress and burnout of frontline staff and contributes to our healthcare workforce shortage. This study looked at the rate of reported incidents before the pandemic and during the first years of the pandemic. The study found no significant drop in the number of incidents despite an overall decline in the patient volume in hospitals. The bill would improve hospital safety by requiring metal detectors and appropriate staffing at public entrances to hospitals.”

Assembly Bill 1034 (Grayson & Cortese):

• Summary: extends the sunset date on provisions exempting specified construction industry employers and employees from the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA).

• Need for the bill: according to the author: “This bill would extend the exemption sunset date for lawsuits originated under the Private Attorney Generals Act (PAGA) for contractors in the building and construction trades that are party to a valid collective bargaining agreement (CBA) meeting specified criteria and have negotiated with their local union to include the waiver in their CBA. The statute doesn’t alter a local union’s ability to decide to include or not include the PAGA wavier in their CBA. Including the waiver would continue to be a subject of bargaining at the local level by each union. There are two PAGA exemption sunset dates under existing law with one expiring 1/1/25 and the other expiring on 1/1/28. The first sunset date will not allow CBA’s to benefit from the exemption if a CBA expires between those two dates, yet the policy rationale remains the same. This bill eliminates the confusion of the first sunset date and simply extend the 2028 date out ten years to 2038.”

In addition, two bills already signed this past July affect workplace posters:

Assembly Bill 1870 (Ortega) - requires employers to include information concerning an employee’s right to consult a licensed attorney in their workers’ compensation employee rights notice.

Assembly Bill 2299 (Flora) - requires the Labor Commissioner (LC) to develop a model list of employees’ rights and responsibilities under existing whistleblower laws for employer use to meet existing posting requirements. Prior to this new law, the Labor Commissioner provided a sample notice where it stated that it doesn’t guarantee compliance with the posting requirements.

 

Questions? Please contact Rosasco Law Group for more information on any of these newly enacted employment laws and for all of your workplace compliance needs.