Seyfarth Synopsis:<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0With the Governor\u2019s September 30 deadline to sign bills behind us, we review the employment bills that made the cut to become laws, as well as those that didn\u2019t survive the season. The most notable new laws read intersectionality into FEHA protected categories, recast victims\u2019 time off provisions, adjust paid family leave, and impact protections for freelance workers and whistleblowers.<\/em><\/p>\n We previously detailed<\/a> the cornucopia of key bills California legislators introduced in 2024. Below is our summary of the labor and employment bills the Governor signed into law and key measures that were vetoed. All new laws are effective January 1, 2025, unless otherwise stated.<\/p>\n Soon-to-be-New Laws<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 1137<\/strong><\/a>\u2013\u00a0Protected Characteristics: Intersectionality<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 1137 makes California the first jurisdiction to explicitly adopt the concept of intersectionality and clarifies how courts should assess overlapping claims under the state\u2019s anti-discrimination laws. As stated in the law, intersectionality \u201ccaptures the unique, interlocking forms of discrimination and harassment experienced by individuals in the workplace and throughout society, particularly Black women, as compared to Black men and White women.\u201d Under this new law, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (\u201cFEHA\u201d) will expressly protect the intersection, or any combination of the currently-enumerated protected characteristics from discrimination.\u00a0<\/p>\n The bill amends Sections 12920 and 12926 of the Government Code (also amends the Unruh Act and Education Code).<\/em><\/p>\n AB 1815<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 Race Discrimination \u2013 Hairstyles<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 1815 expands the definition of \u201crace\u201d under the FEHA by removing the term \u201chistorically\u201d and including traits associated with race beyond hair texture and protective hairstyles. The new law will also add definitions for \u201crace\u201d and \u201cprotective hairstyle\u201d to the Unruh Act.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 51 of the Civil Code, Section 212.1 of the Education Code, and Section 12926 of the Government Code.<\/em><\/p>\n SB 1340<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 Discrimination: Local Enforcement<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 1340 specifies that nothing in the FEHA limits or restricts efforts by any city, county or other political subdivision of the state to enforce local anti-discrimination laws if certain requirements are met. Local laws can be enforced when an employment complaint has been filed with the CRD after the CRD has issued a right to sue notice (but before the expiration of the time to file a civil action in the notice) and the local law at issue is at least as protective as the FEHA. The law requires the CRD to promulgate regulations governing local enforcement pursuant to these provisions.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 12993 of the Government Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB\u00a02499<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 \u201cVictims\u201d Time Off<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 2499 expands and recasts jury, court, and victim time off provisions as unlawful practices under the FEHA (previously addressed in the Labor Code), placing them under the CRD\u2019s enforcement authority. Specifically, the law prohibits the discrimination\/retaliation\/discharge of an employee who: takes time off for jury service; takes time off to appear in court as a witness under court order; is a victim and takes time off to obtain relief for their\/their child\u2019s health, safety, welfare; and (for employers with 25 or more employees) is a victim\/has a family member who takes time off to assist the family member for various reasons related to\u00a0a qualifying act of violence<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0(instead of crime\/crime or abuse).\u00a0<\/p>\n Additionally, the new law expands eligibility for reasonable accommodations to include an employee who is a victim\/has a family member who is a victim of a qualifying act of violence.\u00a0Employees will be able to use vacation, personal, and paid sick leave for leaves granted as reasonable accommodations under this provision. Such leave will run concurrently with CFRA\/FMLA (if the employee would have been eligible), and be subject to time use limitations. Employers will be required to inform employees of their rights in writing at hire and upon request.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 214 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 48205 of the Education Code; add Section 12945.8 to the Government Code, and amends Section 246.5 of, and repeals Sections 230 and 230.1 of the Labor Code (among other things).<\/em><\/p>\n SB 1105<\/a> \u2013 Paid Sick Leave \u2013 Agricultural Employees<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 1105 expands California\u2019s existing paid sick leave provisions to allow agricultural employees who work outside to use their currently entitled paid sick leave to avoid smoke, heat, or flooding conditions created by a local or state emergency. The law states that its purpose is to confirm that California\u2019s Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 (\u201cHWHFA\u201d) provides for the use of paid sick leave under these circumstances under the preexisting \u201cpreventive care\u201d reason for use. While this term is not defined in the HWHFA, the Department of Industrial Relations\u2019 FAQs<\/a> provide that examples of preventive care are annual exams and flu shots. To the extent the legislature intended for \u201cpreventive care\u201d to be a more expansive term, SB 1105 provides an important clarification.<\/p>\n This bill amends Section 246.5 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n SB 1100<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Discrimination: Driver\u2019s License<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 1100 prohibits statements in employment materials (such as a job advertisement, posting, or application) that an applicant must have a driver\u2019s license. The only exceptions are if the employer reasonably expects the position\u2019s duties to require driving and reasonably believes that an alternative form of transportation would not be comparable in travel time or cost to the employer. Alternative forms of transportation may include a ride hailing service, taxi, carpooling, bicycling, or walking.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 12940 of the Government Code.<\/em><\/p>\n SB\u00a0399<\/strong><\/a> \u2013\u00a0Captive Meetings Ban<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 399 prohibits an employer from subjecting or threatening discrimination or adverse action against any employee who declines to attend or participate in, receive, or listen to an employer-sponsored meeting or communications regarding the employer\u2019s opinion about religious or political matters. The new law requires employers to continue paying employees who refuse to attend such meetings, and imposes a civil penalty of $500 per employee for each violation. We may well see challenges to this new law, as opponents of the bill were vocal that it is preempted by the NLRA.<\/p>\n The bill adds Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 1137) to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 2123<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Paid Family Leave\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0<\/p>\n Under AB 2123, employers can no longer require employees to take up to two weeks of earned and unused vacation before the employee\u2019s initial receipt of paid family leave benefits during any 12-month period in which employees are eligible for these benefits.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 3303.1 of the Unemployment Insurance Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 1888<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 DOJ Labor Trafficking Unit<\/strong><\/p>\n Governor Newsom approved <\/a>AB 1888 to establish a Labor Trafficking Unit within the DOJ that will \u201cincrease leadership and coordination among state agencies to combat labor trafficking in California.\u201d The Governor signed three other non-employment-related human trafficking bills the same day: AB 2020, SB 963, and SB 1414.<\/p>\n The bill adds and repeals Section 12530.5 to the Government Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 3234<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 Social Compliance Audit<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 3234 requires an employer that has voluntarily subjected itself to a \u201csocial compliance audit\u201d relating to labor laws (regardless of whether the audit is to determine if the employer uses child labor) to post a report detailing the findings of its compliance with child labor laws on its website. The new law defines a \u201csocial compliance audit\u201d as a voluntary, nongovernmental inspection or assessment of an employer\u2019s operations or practices to evaluate whether the operations or practices are in compliance with state and federal labor laws, including wage and hour and health and safety regulations, including those regarding child labor.<\/p>\n The bill adds Chapter 1.5 (commencing with Section 1250) to Part 4 of Division 2 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 2738<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 Labor Code Enforcement and OSHA Training<\/strong><\/p>\n In an effort to address <\/a>worker injuries and fatalities at concert festivals, this law requires contracts with entertainment events vendors to provide in writing that upon hire for a live event, the vendor will furnish to the contracting entity certain information about the federal and Cal\/OSHA trainings its own employees and subcontractors\u2019 employees have completed.<\/p>\n This new law also authorizes public prosecutors enforcing Labor Code violations to recover all remedies available under the Labor Code, which would go first to workers for unpaid wages, damages, or penalties, and the remainder to the General Fund. It also authorizes recovery of fees and costs to the prevailing plaintiff in such an action.<\/p>\n The bill amends Sections 181, 9251, and 9252 of, and adds Section 9252.1 to the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 1034<\/strong><\/a> <\/strong>\u2013 PAGA exemption: Construction Industry Employees<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 1034 extends the current January 1, 2028 expiration date of the PAGA exemption for employees in the construction industry applicable to work performed under a valid collective bargaining agreement in effect any time before January 1, 2025, to 2038.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 2699.6 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n SB 988<\/strong>\u00a0<\/a>\u2013 \u201cFreelance Worker Protection Action Act\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 988 requires a \u201chiring party\u201d (not limited to an employer) to pay an Independent Contractor (\u201cIC\u201d) on the date specified by the contract, or if unspecified, no later than 30 days after completion of the freelance worker\u2019s services. This new law prohibits requiring the freelance worker\u00a0to accept less compensation than what is specified by the contract, to provide more goods or services, or to grant additional intellectual property rights as a condition of timely payment. The hiring party and IC will need to enter into a written contract that the hiring party must retain for no fewer than four years. Hiring parties are also prohibited from discriminating \u00a0against an IC for asserting rights under these provisions, and the law creates a private right of action with injunctive relief, damages, fees, and costs available.<\/p>\n The bill adds Part 5 (Section 18100 et seq) to Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 224<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 Newspaper Distributors and Carriers AB 5 Exemption Extension<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 224 extends the exemption from the application of Dynamex<\/em> to newspaper distributors working under contracts with publisher\/carriers until January 1, 2030, and extends the corresponding mandatory LWDA payroll and wage reporting requirements.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 2783 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 2754<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 Port Drayage Motor Carriers Contracts \u2013 Liability<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 2754 extends existing Labor Code provisions to port drayage motor carriers. These provisions prohibit a person or entity from entering into contracts for labor or services with certain types of contractors if they know or should have known that the contract does not include sufficient funds to allow the contractor to comply with all applicable employment laws. The law also imposes joint and several liability for customers of port drayage motor carriers where the motor carriers misclassify drivers as independent contractors.<\/p>\n The bill amends Sections 2810 and 2810.4 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 2364<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 Property Service Worker (Janitorial) Protections<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 2364 increases the payment provided to qualified organizations that provide mandatory sexual violence and harassment prevention training to janitors. The rates will jump from $65 per participant to $200 per participant for training sessions having fewer than 10 participants, and $80 per participant for training sessions with 10 or more participants, except as specified. These enumerated rate hikes will be in effect until January 1, 2026, and then increase each year thereafter. The new law also requires the DIR to contract with the UCLA Labor Center to study opportunities to improve janitorial industry worker safety and rights.<\/p>\n The bill amends Sections 1420 and 1429.5 of, and adds and repeals Section 1429.6 of, the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n Bills Already Signed Into Law<\/strong><\/p>\n Some laws were ahead of the curve, and were signed into law much earlier in the legislative session.<\/p>\n AB 2299<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Whistleblower Protections Posting<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 2299, signed into law July 15, 2024, requires the Labor Commissioner to develop, and an employer to post, a\u00a0model list<\/a>\u00a0of employees\u2019 rights and responsibilities under the State\u2019s whistleblower laws.\u00a0<\/em>An employer is considered compliant with the posting requirement set forth in Labor Code section 1102.8 if the employer posts the model list.<\/p>\n The bill amends Section 1102.8 and adds Section 98.11 to the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 2288<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0<\/strong>SB 92<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 PAGA Compromise<\/strong><\/p>\n We\u00a0previously detailed<\/a>\u00a0the sweeping PAGA reforms effectuated by AB 2288 and SB 92, which were signed into law on June 21, 2024 and are retroactively effective as of June 19, 2024.<\/p>\n The bills amend Sections 2699 and 2699.5 of the Labor Code, and amend, repeals and add Section 2699.3 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n AB 2049<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Summary Judgment Filing Deadlines<\/strong><\/p>\n AB 2049, signed into law on July 15, 2024, changes the deadline for a party to file a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication from the current 75 days to at least 81 days before the hearing on the motion. The deadlines for filing an opposition are likewise extended from 14 days to at least 20 days before the hearing, and for filing a reply from 5 days to at least 11 days before the hearing. The new law prohibits a party from filing more than one motion for summary judgment against an adverse party (multiple motions for summary adjudication are excluded from this prohibition) without leave of court, and expressly prohibits the introduction of new facts in a reply to an opposition to a motion for summary judgment.\u00a0<\/p>\n This bill amends Section 437c of the Code of Civil Procedure.<\/em><\/p>\n SB 828<\/a> \u2013 Minimum Wages: Health Care Workers Delay<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 828 was signed into law on May 31, 2024 and delayed the implementation of SB 525, the health care minimum wage law signed by Governor Newsom on October 13, 2023. This law moved all minimum wage adjustments in SB 525 by one month, which meant that the minimum wage schedule took effect on July 1, 2024 instead of June 1, 2024. Additionally, all future minimum wage increases scheduled to take place after 2024 will take place on July 1, rather than June 1, of each year.<\/p>\n This bill amends Sections 1182.14 and 1182.15 of the Labor Code.<\/em><\/p>\n Bills That Did Not Make the Cut<\/strong><\/p>\n SB 1022<\/strong><\/a> \u2013\u00a0CRD Group\/Class Civil Action Filing Extension: <\/strong>This bill would have made a variety of changes to FEHA administrative timelines, including changes to tolling rules and extending the deadline for the Civil Rights Department (CRD) Director to file a group or class complaint to seven years from the date of the alleged violation. This would have tacked years onto the CRD\u2019s current time limits to bring systemic complaints, and was the very reason why the Governor vetoed <\/a>the bill.\u00a0 Despite the veto, the Governor encouraged the Legislature to try again next year with a more reasonable period for CRD to initiate a group or class complaint.<\/p>\n AB 1832<\/strong><\/a> \u2013 CRD Human Trafficking Task Force: <\/strong>This bill would have established a Labor Trafficking Task Force within the CRD, \u201ctasked\u201d with taking various actions and working with various state agencies, to combat labor trafficking. Governor Newsom vetoed <\/a>the bill as redundant of AB 1888.<\/p>\n SB 1116\u00a0<\/strong><\/a>\u2013 Benefits for Striking Workers:\u00a0<\/strong>Under this bill, after two weeks of an employee\u2019s absence due to a trade dispute or strike, the employee would have been eligible for unemployment benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Code.<\/p>\n AB 2494<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 Employer Notification:<\/strong>\u00a0This bill would have required all employers, public and private, to provide employees with a written notice of coverage under COBRA, in-person and via email, following termination or reduction in hours.<\/p>\n AB 2930<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\u2013 AI & Automated Decision Systems:\u00a0<\/strong>This bill would have regulated the use of automated decision tools in employment pay, promotion, hiring, termination, or task allocation for purposes of determining employment terms or conditions.\u00a0Expect more action on this topic in years to come, as the Governor\u2019s veto message on AB 1047<\/a> previewed.<\/p>\n Workplace Solutions<\/strong><\/p>\n Sign up for our October 2, 2024 webinar regarding these new laws and the new compliance obligations they create for employers. Visit us at\u00a0Cal Peculiarities<\/a> for regular updates on the oddities of California employment law, and check out our\u00a0Policy Matters podcast<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0newsletter<\/a>\u00a0for regular check-ins on California (and national) policy and legislative updates.<\/p>\n Edited by\u00a0Cathy Feldman<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Elizabeth Levy<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Seyfarth Synopsis:\u00a0With the Governor\u2019s September 30 deadline to sign bills behind us, we review the employment bills that made the cut to become laws, as well as those that didn\u2019t survive the season. The most notable new laws read intersectionality into FEHA protected categories, recast victims\u2019 time off provisions, adjust paid family leave, and impact […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":59296,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[97],"tags":[10952,2070,3824,22022,4238],"dealstore":[],"offerexpiration":[],"class_list":["post-59295","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-legal","tag-bills","tag-cut","tag-final","tag-legislative","tag-update"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.calpeculiarities.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2022\/06\/iStock-186713874-615x410-1.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n