By Fred W. Alvarez, Hannah L. Jones, Daniel M. Bruggebrew, Allison Moser, Hannah Withers, Stacey Zartler, and Maya Mercado

California’s 2026 legislative session has come to a close, and the Governor has signed a number of new employment measures that will affect California employers in 2027 and beyond. The new laws address a range of workplace issues, including AI and automation, pay practices and reporting, leaves of absence, discrimination and harassment, and workplace safety.

This update highlights the significant employment laws enacted during the recently concluded legislative session, explains their practical implications, and identifies steps employers should consider taking now. Our focus is not simply on what changed, but on what employers need to know and do to prepare for the year ahead.

AI, Automation & the Workplace

New Law	What Employers Need to Know	What Employers Should Do
SB 947 – Revised No Robo Boss Act	Beginning July 1, 2027, employers may not rely solely on an Automated Decision System (“ADS”) to make disciplinary or termination decisions in employment. If an ADS is the primary basis for the decision, a human must independently corroborate the decision using the same data relied upon by the ADS. Employers must also notify the employee in writing of the use of the ADS when communicating the decision and provide certain information about the ADS-based decision. Upon request, the employer must provide the employee with a “meaningful, objective description” of the data used by the ADS.	Employers should identify any ADS used in discipline or termination decisions and establish a human-review process that satisfies the new requirements. Employers should also work with vendors now to understand what data their systems use to make decisions and ensure they are prepared to provide employees with the required information about an ADS-based decision.
SB 951 – WARN Notice Updates for Layoffs Resulting from AI	California WARN notices are required when a mass layoff is caused, in whole or substantial part, by AI or other automated technology. The WARN notice must include additional information about the use of the technology, including the job functions being automated. These new requirements take effect on January 1, 2027.	When planning a potentially covered mass layoff, employers should identify early whether AI or automation is the cause of the employment actions. HR should coordinate with business and technology teams to understand and document the role of the technology and ensure that any required WARN notice includes the necessary information.
AB 1883 – AI Workplace Surveillance	Beginning January 1, 2027, employers may not use workplace surveillance tools that use AI to recognize, infer, or predict an employee’s emotional state or that collect neural data.	Employers should inventory workplace surveillance and monitoring technologies, including tools provided by third-party vendors, and determine whether any features analyze employees’ emotional states or collect neural data.

 

Pay Practices & Pay Data Reporting

New Law	What Employers Need to Know	What Employers Should Do
AB 1697 – “Anti-TRAP” Updates	California’s “anti-TRAP” law, AB 692, took effect on January 1, 2026, restricting employers’ use of training and retention repayment provisions and other “stay-or-pay” arrangements. AB 1697 gives employers additional time—until January 1, 2027—to bring existing agreements into compliance. AB 1697 also makes an important substantive change: it removes the requirement that certain bonus repayment agreements be entered into at the “outset of employment” to be enforceable, potentially expanding the exception to cover retention bonuses and other discretionary bonuses offered later in employment.	Employers should use the additional compliance period to identify existing agreements and arrangements that require employees to repay bonuses, training costs, or other amounts if they leave employment, and determine whether they comply with the amended law. Employers considering new retention or discretionary bonus programs should also evaluate whether the expanded bonus exception provides additional flexibility in structuring repayment provisions.
SB 1237 – Increased Penalty for Pay Data Reporting Violations	For 2027, the penalty for repeated failure to submit required pay data reports increases from $250 to $1,000 per employee. Beginning in 2027, employers must also report employees using the 23 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) major groups, rather than the EEO-1 job categories previously used for California pay data reporting.	Employers subject to California’s pay data reporting requirements should update their reporting processes to use the new SOC classifications and begin mapping employees to the appropriate categories well before the filing deadline. Given the significant increase in penalties, employers should also confirm responsibility and timelines for collecting, reviewing, and submitting required pay data.

 

Leaves of Absence

New Law	What Employers Need to Know	What Employers Should Do
SB 1149 – Expanded Bereavement Leave for a “Designated Person”	Beginning January 1, 2027, employees may now take up to five days of protected bereavement leave following the death of a “designated person,” which is added to the list of qualifying family relationships. Employers may limit employees to one designated person in a 12-month period.	Employers should update bereavement-leave policies and leave procedures to include designated persons and train HR personnel and managers on the expanded eligibility requirements. Employers that limit employees to one designated person per 12-month period should also establish a process for tracking those designations.

Discrimination, Harassment & Workplace Training

New Law	What Employers Need to Know	What Employers Should Do
AB 1803 – Anti-hate Speech Training	Beginning January 1, 2028, employers must incorporate anti-hate speech training and education into California’s required sexual-harassment prevention training.	Employers should update their sexual-harassment prevention training materials to incorporate the new anti-hate speech requirements before the January 1, 2028 effective date.

Workplace Safety

New Law	What Employers Need to Know	What Employers Should Do
AB 1961 – Workplace Violence Restraining Orders	Beginning January 1, 2027, employers may seek workplace violence restraining orders in broader circumstances. Previously, an employer was required to identify a specific employee who faced a credible threat of violence and name that employee as a protected party. Under the new law, employers may seek an order protecting the workforce more broadly without identifying a specific employee as the target of the threat.	Employers should consider pursuing workplace violence restraining orders when threats are directed at the workplace or workforce generally, even if no individual employee has been specifically targeted.

 

The Coblentz Employment team is available to answer any questions you may have about the impact of these regulations.

By Scott Hall and Phillip Wiese

The much-discussed California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) amendment, SB 690, has been signed by Governor Gavin Newsom and will take effect January 1, 2027, relieving some pressure businesses face from the flood of litigation, arbitration, and demand letters relating to the use of analytics or marketing technology on their websites.

Under the new law, private plaintiffs can no longer assert claims under the CIPA pen register and trap and trace provisions, Cal. Penal Code § 638.51. Instead, only the California Attorney General may bring those claims. Additionally, the law is retroactive and applies to any claim filed on or after January 1, 2025. Plaintiffs used this provision to allege that the use of common website analytics tools constituted a pen register or trap and trace device on their computer and, thus, they were entitled to $5,000 statutory damages per violation.

However, the law will not prevent all CIPA or cookie-based claims going forward. Plaintiffs often paired pen register claims with CIPA wiretapping claims under Cal. Penal Code § 631, which may still be brought by private plaintiffs, and plaintiffs are also pivoting to allege claims under other state and federal laws, including the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, consumer protection laws, and others.

Going forward, companies should remain vigilant about cookie and pixel use on their websites and continue to mitigate risks from those technologies by conducting regular audits and reviews of the specific technology they use. Companies should also confirm that any cookies, pixels, or other third-party analytics tools on their websites are used and operating as described in their privacy disclosures.

The Coblentz Data Privacy and Cybersecurity team is experienced in handling CIPA claims based on these analytics technologies and advising clients on the best practices for their use to navigate the changing legal landscape. Please reach out to Scott Hall or Phillip Wiese for further information or assistance.