Amended in Assembly May 24, 2013

Amended in Assembly April 11, 2013

California Legislature—2013–14 Regular Session

Assembly BillNo. 263


Introduced by Assembly Member Roger Hernández

February 7, 2013


An act to amend Sections 98.6, 1102.5, and 1103 of, to add Section 1024.6 to, and to add Chapter 3.1 (commencing with Section 1019) to Part 3 of Division 2 of, the Labor Code, relating to employment.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 263, as amended, Roger Hernández. Employment: retaliation: immigration-related practices.

Existing law prohibits an employer from discharging an employee or in any manner discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment because the employee or applicant has engaged in prescribed protected conduct relating to the enforcement of the employee’s or applicant’s rights. Existing law provides that an employee who made a bona fide complaint, and was consequently discharged or otherwise suffered an adverse action, is entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for an employer to willfully refuse to reinstate or otherwise restore an employee who is determined by a specified procedure to be eligible for reinstatement.

This bill would also prohibit an employer from retaliating or taking adverse action against any employee or applicant for employment because the employee or applicant has engaged in protected conduct. The bill would provide that an employee who was retaliated against or otherwise was subjected to an adverse action is entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement for lost wages. The bill would subject a person who violates these provisions to a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per violation. The bill would also provide that it is not necessary to exhaust administrative remedies or procedures in the enforcement of these provisions. Because the willful refusal by an employer to reinstate or reimburse an employee who suffered a retaliatory action under these provisions would be a misdemeanor, the bill would expand the scope of a crime and impose a state-mandated local program.

Existing law declares that an individual who has applied for employment, or who is or has been employed in this state, is entitled to the protections, rights, and remedies available under state law, regardless of his or her immigration status. Existing law declares that an inquiry into a person’s immigration status for purposes of enforcing state labor and employment laws shall not be permitted, unless a showing is made, by clear and convincing evidence, that the inquiry is necessary in order to comply with federal immigration law.

This bill would make it unlawful for an employer or any other person to engage in, or direct another person to engage in, an unfair immigration-related practice, as defined, against a person for the purpose of, or with the intent of, retaliating against any person for exercising a right protected under state labor and employment laws or under a local ordinance applicable to employees, as specified. The bill would also create a rebuttable presumption that an adverse action taken within 90 days of the exercising of a protected right is committed for the purpose of, or with the intent of, retaliation.

The bill would authorize a civil action by an employee or other person who is the subject of an unfair immigration-related practice, and would require a court to order the appropriate government agencies to suspend forbegin delete 90end deletebegin insert 14end insert days the business license, as defined, of a person who violates these provisions for a first violation,begin delete as specified, and to permanently revokeend deletebegin insert to suspend for 30 or 90 daysend insert that license for a 2nd orbegin delete subsequentend deletebegin insert 3rdend insert violation,begin insert respectively, and to permanently revoke that license for a 4th violation or if the court establishes a pattern or practice of willful violations,end insert as specified.begin delete The bill would require the court to send a copy of its order to the Attorney General, and would require the Attorney General to maintain these copies and a database of violations of these provisions, and post copies of the court orders on the Attorney General’s Internet Web site.end delete The bill would authorize a person who prevails in an action pursuant to these provisions to recover reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

Existing law prohibits an employer from making, adopting, or enforcing any rule, regulation, or policy preventing an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency, where the employee has reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state or federal statute, or a violation or noncompliance with a state or federal rule or regulation. Existing law further prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee for that disclosure. Under existing law, a violation of these provisions by the employer is a misdemeanor. Existing law additionally subjects an employer that is a corporation or a limited liability company to a civil penalty not exceeding $10,000 for each violation of these provisions.

This bill would additionally prohibit any person or entity from making, adopting, or enforcing any rule, regulation, or policy preventing an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency, as provided, and would prohibit any person or entity from retaliating against an employee for that disclosure. This bill would provide that any person or entity that violates these provisions is guilty of a misdemeanor, and would further subject an entity that violates these provisions that is a corporation or limited liability company to a civil penalty of not exceeding $10,000 for each violation of these provisions. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Existing law prohibits an employer or prospective employer, with the exception of certain financial institutions, from obtaining a consumer credit report, as defined, for employment purposes unless it is for a specified position, including, among others, a position in the state Department of Justice, a managerial position, as defined, or a position that involves regular access to $10,000 or more of cash, as specified.

This bill would prohibit an employer from discharging an employee or in any manner discriminating, retaliating, or taking any adverse action against an employee because the employee updates or attempts to update his or her personal information, unless the changes are directly related to the skill set, qualifications, or knowledge required for the job.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

P4    1

SECTION 1.  

The Legislature finds and declares all of the
2following:

3(a) Wage theft is a serious and widespread problem that causes
4severe hardship to low-wage workers, their families, and their
5communities.

6(b) When a worker is denied wages or forced to work “off the
7clock,” there is an immediate and irreparable harm to the worker
8and his or her family.

9(c) Low-wage, often immigrant, workers are the most frequent
10victims of wage theft and are also exposed to the greatest hazards
11at work.

12(d) Immigrant workers have the greatest number of work-related
13injuries and fatalities.

14(e) Far too often, when workers come forward to expose unfair,
15unsafe, or illegal conditions, they face retaliation from the
16employer.

17(f) Where there are immigrant workers involved, employer
18retaliation often involves threats to contact law enforcement
19agencies, including immigration enforcement agencies, if a worker
20engages in protected conduct.

21(g) No employee should have to fear adverse action, whether it
22involves threats to cut hours, move a worker to night shift, or
23contact law enforcement agencies, simply for engaging in rights
24the State of California has deemed so important that they are
25protected by law.

26(h) It is in the public policy interest of the State of California
27that workers be able to report concerns to their employers without
28fear of retaliation or discrimination.

29(i) It is in the public policy interest of the State of California
30for workers to be willing to come forward to expose hazardous,
31unsafe, and unfair conditions at their worksites so that local, state,
32and federal agencies can effectively enforce the laws.

33(j) It is essential to the enforcement of this state’s labor laws
34that we have broad, clear, and effective protections for workers
P5    1engaging in conduct protected by law from all forms of employer
2retaliation, including prohibiting immigration-related threats.

3

SEC. 2.  

Section 98.6 of the Labor Code is amended to read:

4

98.6.  

(a) A person may not discharge an employee or in any
5manner discriminate, retaliate, or take any adverse action against
6any employee or applicant for employment because the employee
7or applicant engaged in any conduct delineated in this chapter,
8including the conduct described in subdivision (k) of Section 96,
9and Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 1101) of Part 3 of
10Division 2, or because the employee or applicant for employment
11has filed a bona fide complaint or claim or instituted or caused to
12be instituted any proceeding under or relating to his or her rights,
13which are under the jurisdiction of the Labor Commissioner, or
14because the employee has initiated any action or notice pursuant
15to Section 2699, or has testified or is about to testify in a
16proceeding pursuant to that section, or because of the exercise by
17the employee or applicant for employment on behalf of himself,
18herself, or others of any rights afforded him or her.

19(b) (1) Any employee who is discharged, threatened with
20discharge, demoted, suspended, retaliated against, subjected to an
21adverse action, or in any other manner discriminated against in
22the terms and conditions of his or her employment because the
23employee engaged in any conduct delineated in this chapter,
24including the conduct described in subdivision (k) of Section 96,
25and Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 1101) of Part 3 of
26Division 2, or because the employee has made a bona fide
27complaint or claim to the division pursuant to this part, or because
28the employee has initiated any action or notice pursuant to Section
292699 shall be entitled to reinstatement and reimbursement for lost
30wages and work benefits caused by those acts of the employer.

31(2) An employer who willfully refuses to hire, promote, or
32otherwise restore an employee or former employee who has been
33determined to be eligible for rehiring or promotion by a grievance
34procedure, arbitration, or hearing authorized by law, is guilty of a
35misdemeanor.

36(3) In addition to other remedies available, an employer who
37violates this section is liable for a civil penalty not exceeding ten
38thousand dollars ($10,000) per employee for each violation of this
39section.

P6    1(4) In the enforcement of this section, there is no requirement
2that an individual exhaust administrative remedies or procedures.

3(c) (1) Any applicant for employment who is refused
4employment, who is not selected for a training program leading
5to employment, or who in any other manner is discriminated
6against in the terms and conditions of any offer of employment
7because the applicant engaged in any conduct delineated in this
8chapter, including the conduct described in subdivision (k) of
9Section 96, and Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 1101) of
10Part 3 of Division 2, or because the applicant has made a bona fide
11complaint or claim to the division pursuant to this part, or because
12the employee has initiated any action or notice pursuant to Section
132699 shall be entitled to employment and reimbursement for lost
14wages and work benefits caused by the acts of the prospective
15employer.

16(2) This subdivision shall not be construed to invalidate any
17collective bargaining agreement that requires an applicant for a
18position that is subject to the collective bargaining agreement to
19sign a contract that protects either or both of the following as
20specified in subparagraphs (A) and (B), nor shall this subdivision
21be construed to invalidate any employer requirement of an
22applicant for a position that is not subject to a collective bargaining
23agreement to sign an employment contract that protects either or
24both of the following:

25(A) An employer against any conduct that is actually in direct
26conflict with the essential enterprise-related interests of the
27employer and where breach of that contract would actually
28constitute a material and substantial disruption of the employer’s
29operation.

30(B) A firefighter against any disease that is presumed to arise
31in the course and scope of employment, by limiting his or her
32consumption of tobacco products on and off the job.

33(d) The provisions of this section creating new actions or
34remedies that are effective on January 1, 2002, to employees or
35applicants for employment do not apply to any state or local law
36enforcement agency, any religious association or corporation
37specified in subdivision (d) of Section 12926 of the Government
38Code, except as provided in Section 12926.2 of the Government
39Code, or any person described in Section 1070 of the Evidence
40Code.

P7    1

SEC. 3.  

Chapter 3.1 (commencing with Section 1019) is added
2to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Labor Code, to read:

3 

4Chapter  3.1. Unfair Immigration-Related Practices
5

 

6

1019.  

(a) It shall be unlawful for an employer or any other
7person or entity to engage in, or to direct another person or entity
8to engage in, unfair immigration-related practices against any
9person for the purpose of, or with the intent of, retaliating against
10any person for exercising any right protected under this code or
11by any local ordinance applicable to employees. Exercising a right
12protected by this code or local ordinance includes, but is not limited
13to, the following:

14(1) Filing a complaint or informing any person of an employer’s
15or other party’s alleged violation of this code or local ordinance,
16so long as the complaint or disclosure is made in good faith.

17(2) Seeking information regarding whether an employer or other
18party is in compliance with this code or local ordinance.

19(3) Informing a person of his or her potential rights and remedies
20under this code or local ordinance, and assisting him or her in
21asserting those rights.

22(b) (1) As used in this chapter, “unfair immigration-related
23practice” means any of the following practices, when undertaken
24for the retaliatory purposes prohibited by subdivision (a):

25(A) Requesting more or different documents than are required
26under Section 1324a(b) of Title 8 of the United States Code, or a
27refusal to honor documents tendered pursuant to that section that
28on their face reasonably appear to be genuine.

29(B) Using the federal E-Verify system to check the employment
30authorization status of a person at a time or in a manner not
31required under Section 1324a(b) of Title 8 of the United States
32Code, or not authorized under any memorandum of understanding
33governing the use of the federal E-Verify system.

34(C) Threatening to file or the filing of a false police report.

35(D) Threatening to contactbegin insert or contactingend insert immigration authorities.

36(2) “Unfair immigration-related practice” does not include
37conduct undertaken at the express and specific direction or request
38of the federal government.

39(c) Engaging in an unfair immigration-related practice against
40a person within 90 days of the person’s exercise of rights protected
P8    1under this code or local ordinance applicable to employees shall
2raise a rebuttable presumption of having done so in retaliation for
3the exercise of those rights.

4(d) (1) An employee or other person who is the subject of an
5unfair immigration-related practice prohibited by this section, or
6a representative of that employee or person, may bring a civil
7action for equitable relief and any damages or penalties, in
8accordance with this section.

9(2) Upon a finding by a court of applicable jurisdiction of a
10violation this section:

11(A) For a first violation, the court shall order the appropriate
12government agencies to suspend all licenses subject to this chapter
13that are held by the violating party for a period ofbegin delete 90end deletebegin insert 14end insert days. For
14the purposes of this paragraph, the licenses that are subject to
15suspension are all licenses held by the violating party specific to
16the business location or locations where the unfair
17 immigration-related practice occurred. If the violating party does
18not hold a license specific to the business location or locations
19where the unfair immigration-related practice occurred, but a
20license is necessary to operate the violating party’s business in
21general, the licenses that are subject to suspension under this
22subdivision are all licenses that are held by the violating party at
23the violating party’s primary place of business. On receipt of the
24court’s order and notwithstanding any other law, the appropriate
25agencies shall suspend the licenses according to the court’s order.
26begin delete The court shall send a copy of the court’s order to the Attorney
27General.end delete

28(B) For a secondbegin delete or subsequentend delete violation, the court shall order
29the appropriate government agencies tobegin delete revoke permanentlyend delete
30begin insert suspendend insertbegin insert for a period of 30 daysend insert all licenses that are held by the
31violating party specific to the business location or locations where
32the unfair immigration-related practice occurred. If the violating
33party does not hold a license specific to the business location or
34locations where the unfair immigration-related practice occurred,
35but a license is necessary to operate the violating party’s business
36in general, the court shall order the appropriate agencies to
37begin delete permanently revokeend deletebegin insert suspend for a period of 30 daysend insert all licenses
38that are held by the violating party at the violating party’s primary
39place of business. On receipt of the court’s order and
40notwithstanding any other law, the appropriate agencies shall
P9    1immediatelybegin delete revokeend deletebegin insert suspendend insert the licenses.begin delete The court shall send a
2copy of the court’s order to the Attorney General.end delete

begin insert

3(C) For a third violation, the court shall order the appropriate
4government agencies to suspend for a period of 90 days all licenses
5that are held by the violating party specific to the business location
6or locations where the unfair immigration-related practice
7occurred. If the violating party does not hold a license specific to
8the business location or locations where the unfair
9immigration-related practice occurred, but a license is necessary
10to operate the violating party’s business in general, the court shall
11order the appropriate agencies to suspend for a period of 90 days
12all licenses that are held by the violating party at the violating
13party’s primary place of business. On receipt of the court’s order
14and notwithstanding any other law, the appropriate agencies shall
15immediately suspend the licenses.

end insert
begin insert

16(D) For a fourth violation, or if the court establishes a pattern
17or practice of willful violations, the court shall order the
18appropriate government agencies to permanently revoke all
19 licenses that are held by the violating party specific to the business
20location or locations where the unfair immigration-related practice
21occurred. If the violating party does not hold a license specific to
22the business location or locations where the unfair
23immigration-related practice occurred, but a license is necessary
24to operate the violating party’s business in general, the court shall
25order the appropriate agencies to permanently revoke all licenses
26that are held by the violating party at the violating party’s primary
27place of business. On receipt of the court’s order and
28notwithstanding any other law, the appropriate agencies shall
29immediately revoke the licenses.

end insert
begin delete

30(3) The Attorney General shall maintain copies of court orders
31that are received pursuant to this section, shall maintain a database
32of the violating parties and business locations that have violated
33this section, and make any applicable court orders available on the
34Attorney General’s Internet Web site.

end delete
begin delete

35(4)

end delete

36begin insert(3)end insert An employee or other person who is the subject of an unfair
37immigration-document practice prohibited by this section, and
38who prevails in an action authorized by this section, shall recover
39its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, including any expert
40witness costs.

P10   1(e) (1) As used in this chapter, “license” means any agency
2permit, certificate, approval, registration, charter, or similar form
3of authorization that is required by law and that is issued by any
4agency for the purposes of operating a business in this state,
5including any of the following:

6(A) Articles of incorporation.

7(B) Certificate of partnership, partnership registration, or articles
8of organization.

9(C) Transaction privilege tax license.

10(2) As used in this chapter, “license” does not include a
11professional license.

12

1019.1.  

The provisions of this chapter are severable. If any
13provision of this chapter or its application is held invalid, that
14invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can
15be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

16

SEC. 4.  

Section 1024.6 is added to the Labor Code, to read:

17

1024.6.  

An employer may not discharge an employee or in any
18manner discriminate, retaliate, or take any adverse action against
19an employee because the employee updates or attempts to update
20his or her personal information, unless the changes are directly
21related to the skill set, qualifications, or knowledge required for
22the job.

23

SEC. 5.  

Section 1102.5 of the Labor Code is amended to read:

24

1102.5.  

(a) An employer or any other person or entity may
25not make, adopt, or enforce any rule, regulation, or policy
26preventing an employee from disclosing information to a
27government or law enforcement agency, where the employee has
28reasonable cause to believe that the information discloses a
29violation of state or federal statute, or a violation or noncompliance
30with a state or federal rule or regulation.

31(b) An employer or any other person or entity may not retaliate
32against an employee for disclosing information to a government
33or law enforcement agency, where the employee has reasonable
34cause to believe that the information discloses a violation of state
35or federal statute, or a violation or noncompliance with a state or
36federal rule or regulation.

37(c) An employer or any other person or entity may not retaliate
38against an employee for refusing to participate in an activity that
39would result in a violation of state or federal statute, or a violation
40or noncompliance with a state or federal rule or regulation.

P11   1(d) An employer or any other person or entity may not retaliate
2against an employee for having exercised his or her rights under
3subdivision (a), (b), or (c) in any former employment.

4(e) A report made by an employee of a government agency to
5his or her employer is a disclosure of information to a government
6or law enforcement agency pursuant to subdivisions (a) and (b).

7(f) In addition to other penalties, an employer or other entity
8that is a corporation or limited liability company is liable for a
9civil penalty not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for each
10violation of this section.

11(g) This section does not apply to rules, regulations, or policies
12which implement, or to actions by employers against employees
13who violate, the confidentiality of the lawyer-client privilege of
14Article 3 (commencing with Section 950), the physician-patient
15privilege of Article 6 (commencing with Section 990) of Chapter
164 of Division 8 of the Evidence Code, or trade secret information.

17

SEC. 6.  

Section 1103 of the Labor Code is amended to read:

18

1103.  

An employer or any other person or entity that violates
19this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable, in the case of
20an individual, by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed
21one year or a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) or
22both that fine and imprisonment, or, in the case of a corporation,
23by a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000).

24

SEC. 7.  

No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
25Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
26the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
27district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
28infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
29for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of
30the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within
31the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
32Constitution.



O

    97