Blogs

By: Alexander C. Volberding, Partner, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 

California lawmakers advanced a wide slate of workplace laws that touch on important subjects for special districts, including personnel records, pay transparency, training, wage-judgment enforcement, Civil Rights Department (CRD) procedures, leave, independent-contractor issues, contract restrictions, county retirement systems, and public-employee misconduct. Below is a quick rundown of significant bills, with the code sections implicated by the new laws.

SB 513 (Durazo) — Personnel Records: Education & Training

California’s Labor Code gives current and former employees or their representatives the right to inspect and obtain copies of personnel records related to performance and grievances. Employers must produce those records and violations can be criminal.

What SB 513 does: Amends Labor Code section 1198.5 to bring education and training files into the scope of inspectable personnel records. For employers that maintain such files, the records must include the following information:

• Employee name
• Training provider
• Training duration and date
• Core competencies (including equipment or software skills)
• Resulting certification or qualification

SB 303 (Smallwood-Cuevas) — Bias Mitigation Training

The CRD enforces the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) prohibitions on employment and housing discrimination.

What SB 303 does: Adds Government Code section 12940.2 to the FEHA to provide that, when an employee, in good faith, is asked or required during a bias-mitigation training to assess, test, admit, or acknowledge their own personal biases, that acknowledgment does not, by itself, constitute unlawful discrimination.

SB 642 (Limón) — Pay Scale & Wage Ranges 

The Labor Code requires employers to provide applicants with a pay scale upon request and to include pay ranges in job postings for employers with more than 15 employees. Equal-pay provisions prohibit paying employees less than employees of another sex, race, or ethnicity for substantially similar work.

What SB 642 does: Amends Labor Code sections 432.3 and 1197.5 to do the following: 

• Redefines “pay scale” as a good-faith estimate of the expected salary or hourly wage range an employer reasonably expects to pay upon hire for a position. Job postings must continue to include this pay scale.
• Gender terminology: Replaces “opposite sex” with “another sex.”
• Limitations period: Extends the time to file a civil action for alleged violations from two to three years after the last date the cause of action occurs and allows recovery for the entire period of the violation, up to six years. A cause of action occurs when any of the following occur: (1) an allegedly unlawful compensation decision or practice is adopted; (2) an individual becomes subject to it; or (3) an individual is affected by its application.

SB 294 (Reyes) — The Workplace Know Your Rights Act

The Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) enforces state labor laws.

What SB 294 does: Adds Part 5.6 (commencing with Section 1550) to the Labor Code, which creates a stand-alone annual employee notice requirement to all current employees by February 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, covering specified worker rights. 

The notice must, at a minimum, cover the following: (1) Workers’ compensation rights and Division of Workers’ Compensation contact info; (2) Notice of immigration agency inspections; (3) Protection from unfair immigration-related practices; (4) Right to organize/join a union and engage in concerted activity; and (5) Constitutional rights at work when interacting with law enforcement (unreasonable searches; self-incrimination).

Employers must provide the notice by personal service, mail, email, text, or another method reasonably expected to be received within one business day. Employers must issue the notice in the language normally used to communicate with employees and maintain compliance records for three years.

The Labor Commissioner will post a template by January 1, 2026, update the notice annually, and offer it in multiple languages.

Employers must, by March 30, 2026, offer employees the chance to name an emergency contact and indicate whether the employer should notify that contact if the employee is arrested or detained on-site, during work hours, or while performing job duties off-site (where the employer has actual knowledge). Employees may update the emergency contact at any time.

SB 294 prohibits retaliation and authorizes the Labor Commissioner and public prosecutors to enforce the law and impose penalties up to $500 per employee per violation per day, and up to $10,000 per employee for emergency-contact-provision violations. SB 294 states that the requirements under the new law may only be waived by a collective bargaining agreement if the agreement clearly and expressly waives the requirements provided for under the law. 

At present, it is not clear whether the bill is intended to apply to public employers. Special districts should consult with their own counsel regarding compliance with the new law.

SB 477 (Blakespear) — CRD (FEHA) Enforcement Procedures 

The CRD enforces the FEHA, which prohibits employment discrimination based on protected characteristics. CRD investigates complaints of alleged violations of discrimination by employers and pursues enforcement actions against employers. 

What SB 477 does: Amends Government Code section 12926, 12960, 12965, 12981 to clarify the CRD complaint processing, deadlines, and right-to-sue rules.

• Group/class complaint defined: Declares the accuracy of the definition under existing law that a group/class complaint is a complaint alleging a pattern or practice of discrimination.
• Right-to-sue deadlines: CRD must issue a right-to-sue no later than one year for an individual complaint and two years for a group/class complaint.
• Related-complaint notices: For complaints related to the CRD Director’s complaint or a group/class complaint, CRD issues a right-to-sue upon the aggrieved person’s request or, if no request, after final disposition and all related proceedings, actions, and appeals have terminated.
• Tolling: Time to file a civil action is tolled (paused) when a complainant timely appeals a closure, signs a written agreement with CRD, or when CRD extends the investigation due to a petition to compel cooperation.

SB 590 (Durazo) — Paid Family Leave for a “Designated Person” 

California’s Paid Family Leave program provides up to eight weeks of wage replacement for specified family-care reasons.

What SB 590 does: Amends Unemployment Insurance Code sections 3301, 3302, and 3303 to expand eligibility to care for a “designated person” - someone related by blood or whose association is the equivalent of a family relationship. First-time claimants must identify the designated person and, under penalty of perjury, attest to the blood relation or the family-equivalent relationship.

This law does not take effect until July 1, 2028.

SB 809 (Durazo) — Employment Status & Vehicle-Use Reimbursements

Courts apply the “ABC” test to determine employee/independent-contractor status in wage and benefit matters. Employers must reimburse employees (not independent contractors) for necessary work-related expenses.

What SB 809 does: Adds Labor Code sections 2750.9, 2775.5, and 2802.2.

• Status clarification: Ownership of a personal or commercial vehicle used to perform labor on behalf of an employer is not determinative of employee/independent-contractor status.
• Reimbursement scope: Clarifies that reimbursable “necessary expenditures” for employees include costs associated with the use of personal and commercial vehicles.
• Construction trucking: Employers must reimburse commercial drivers who are employees and own their trucks/tractors/trailers for use, maintenance, and depreciation.
• Rate setting: Employers and affected drivers who are employees (or their union) must negotiate reimbursement as a flat or per-mile rate, not less than either: (1) the employee’s actual expenses; or (2) the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) standard mileage rate.

At present, this bill does not appear to apply to public employers, but special districts should consult with their own counsel.

AB 692 (Kalra) — Ban on “Employee Repayment” Contract Clauses 

California voids contracts restraining lawful professions except as authorized.

What AB 692 does: Adds Business & Professions Code section 16608 and Labor Code section to prohibit employment or work-related agreements that either: (1) require a worker to repay an employer, training provider, or debt collector if the work relationship ends; or (2) impose a penalty, fee, or cost because of termination.

AB 692 exempts certain repayment requirements imposed by employers, including the following: (1) Government loan-repayment or forgiveness programs; (2) Tuition repayment for transferable educational credentials (meeting specified conditions); (3) Approved apprenticeship programs; (4) Repayment terms tied to a signing bonus or other discretionary/unearned upfront payment; and (5) Residential lease/financing/purchase agreements.

Note that the application of this law to special districts is not clear as the Business & Professions Code does not apply to most public employers. However, special districts should consult with their own counsel.

AB 692 authorizes employees or representatives to sue for actual damages or $5,000 per affected employee (whichever is greater), plus injunctive relief, attorney’s fees, and costs. 

SB 301 (Grayson) — CERL Membership: No Improper Exclusions

The County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CERL) governs county retirement systems.

What SB 301 does: Adds Government Code section 31566, described as reflecting existing law, to prohibit counties/districts from excluding any employee, group, or classification from CERL membership except “excludable officers and employees,” defined as either of the following: (1) those with tenures that are temporary, seasonal, intermittent, or part-time (as determined by the retirement board), or (2) those excluded under Government Code sections 31552 or 31553.

AB 1067 (Quirk-Silva) — Public-Employee Misconduct & PEPRA

The Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA) requires forfeiture of public retirement rights for certain felony convictions tied to official duties or benefit-related misconduct.

What AB 1067 does: Adds Government Code section 7522.76 to provide the following:

• If a public employer’s investigation suggests potential criminal conduct tied to official duties or benefits, the employer must continue the investigation even if the employee retires.
• The employer must refer the matter to appropriate law enforcement and may then close the administrative investigation.
• If a court later convicts the employee of a qualifying felony, the employee forfeits retirement rights and benefits as provided by PEPRA.

This article was contributed by Alexander C. Volberding from Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, a CSDA Business Affiliate. CSDA members can contact Liebert Cassidy Whitmore through the CSDA Buyer’s Guide at csda.net.

This communication is provided for general information only and is not offered or intended as legal advice. Readers should seek the advice of an attorney when confronted with legal issues and attorneys should perform an independent evaluation of the issues raised in these communications.

Take a look back at previous parts of the 2026 New Laws Series in CSDA eNews for more in-depth overviews of new laws affecting special districts:

Missed Part 9? Read it now: New Workers’ Comp Laws Coming into Effect in 2026 and Beyond
Missed Part 8? Read it now: New Mandatory Trainings for Local Government Board Members and Staff (SB 827)
Missed Part 7? Read it now: 45-Day Notification Prior to Contracting for Services (AB 339)
Missed Part 6? Read it now: Positioning Special Districts for Success Under New Permitting and Planning Laws
Missed Part 5? Read it now: Biggest Brown Act Revamp in Decades (SB 707)
Missed Part 4? Read it now: Clarifying Timing for Collection of Development Related Fees (SB 499)
Missed Part 3? Read it now: Certified Payroll Records Requests on Prevailing Wage Public Works Projects (AB 538)
Missed Part 2? Read it now: Additional CEQA Exemptions and Reforms
Missed Part 1? Read it now: CA Supreme Court Denies Elected Officials Right to Sue as “Employees” Under Whistleblower Statute