top of page
Search

California Employment Law Changes for 2027: What Employers Need to Know

Writer: The Talent Authority Team
The Talent Authority Team
1 day ago
6 min read
California employment law changes for 2027 will affect how employers use artificial intelligence, administer leave, structure retention agreements, manage compensation, and monitor employees. Additional requirements have later effective dates, making a clear implementation timeline essential. For HR leaders, preparation extends beyond revising policies. Managers need to understand how the changes affect their everyday decisions, conversations, documentation, and responsibility to involve HR. A policy may establish the requirements, but a supervisor’s response to an employee concern, leave request, or performance issue determines how those requirements are applied. Employers outside California can also use these developments to examine their management practices. The legal obligations are jurisdiction-specific, while questions about human judgment, workplace privacy, consistent treatment, and employee communication have broader relevance. Key California Employment Law Changes for 2027 • AI employment decisions and human review • technology-related workforce displacement • immigration-related retaliation protections • bereavement leave • retention and repayment agreements • pay data reporting • minimum wage changes • workplace surveillance • anti-hate speech training effective in 2028 SB 947: California AI Employment Decisions and Human Review Effective July 1, 2027, SB 947, known as the “No Robo Bosses Act,” limits employers’ reliance on automated decision systems in employment decisions. For disciplinary and termination decisions, the law requires a human reviewer to conduct an independent investigation and compile corroborating information. Employers cannot rely on an automated output that cannot be corroborated or that the reviewer determines is inaccurate or misleading. The law also addresses employee notices and restrictions involving protected characteristics and the exercise of legal rights. The management implication is significant: human review needs to involve an actual evaluation of the information. An automated score may flag a performance concern without accounting for incomplete records, inconsistent assignments, or circumstances affecting an employee’s work. Managers need to understand the facts supporting a recommendation before acting on it. What employers should do: Identify tools that generate employee scores, classifications, or recommendations. Establish who reviews their output, what information supports the review, and how the resulting decision is documented. SB 951: Technology Displacement Notices and Workforce Planning SB 951 adds notice requirements for covered mass layoffs, relocations, or terminations caused wholly or partly by artificial intelligence or other automated technology. The required information addresses the affected workers, their locations and job functions, and the technology contributing to the displacement. For employers considering automation, this connects technology planning with workforce planning. HR needs visibility into proposed changes early enough to assess employee impact and applicable notice requirements. What employers should do: Include HR in discussions about automation before implementation decisions are finalized. Coordinate technology, staffing, communication, and legal review rather than treating each as a separate project. AB 2495: Immigration-Related Retaliation and Employee Rights AB 2495 expands protections against unfair immigration-related practices connected to employees’ exercise or attempted exercise of rights under applicable local, state, or federal law. Protected activities include making good-faith complaints, seeking information about legal compliance, and informing another person about potential rights and remedies. The protections also address conduct related to perceived immigration status that could reasonably discourage someone from exercising a legal right. Managers need to understand that their response to a concern can create additional risk. Frustration, dismissive comments, or attempts to discourage a complaint can undermine an organization’s reporting process. What employers should do: Reinforce expectations for receiving concerns, documenting them appropriately, protecting employees from retaliation, and involving HR. Use realistic scenarios to help managers practice responding when they feel challenged or disagree with an employee. SB 1149: California Bereavement Leave for a Designated Person SB 1149 expands California bereavement leave to include a designated person—someone related to the employee not by blood or whose association with the employee is equivalent to a family relationship. This change warrants a review of policies that rely on the previous list of covered family members. Request forms and manager guidance may also need revision. The leadership implication is straightforward: managers should avoid deciding whether a relationship qualifies based on their own assumptions about family. What employers should do: Update applicable policy language and establish a clear process for evaluating requests. Prepare managers to respond sensitively and obtain eligibility guidance from HR. AB 1697: Stay-or-Pay Agreements, Retention Incentives, and PTO AB 1697 revises California’s restrictions on certain repayment arrangements, including financial incentives used to recruit or retain workers. The revised framework addresses incentives offered during employment and includes conditions involving separate agreements, repayment proration, retention periods, an option to defer payment, and specified separation circumstances. It also establishes a limited framework for repayment of advanced paid time off. These arrangements require careful review because a familiar bonus document or PTO policy may not satisfy the applicable conditions. Employees also need a clear explanation of what they are accepting. When does a payment become fully earned? What could trigger repayment? How would the amount be calculated? What employers should do: Review existing agreements with qualified counsel and align manager explanations with the written terms. Avoid informal promises about repayment obligations or exceptions. SB 1237: California Pay Data Reporting Penalties California employers subject to pay data reporting requirements should prepare for expanded reporting categories affecting reports due in May 2027. SB 1237 also increases the potential penalty for subsequent reporting violations from $200 to $1,000 per employee. The initial-violation penalty remains $100 per employee. Accurate reporting depends on coordination among HR, payroll, and the people responsible for workforce data. Waiting until the filing deadline approaches can leave little time to resolve inconsistent classifications or missing information. What employers should do: Assign ownership, review job-category mapping, and confirm how required information is collected and maintained. California Minimum Wage Changes for 2027 California’s statewide minimum wage increases to $17.40 per hour on January 1, 2027, with a corresponding annual salary threshold of $72,384 for the exempt classifications tied to that calculation. Employers should also review applicable local wage requirements and any industry-specific rules. Changes in pay or classification may affect scheduling, timekeeping, and manager expectations. Meeting a salary threshold alone does not resolve every classification question. What employers should do: Review affected employees before year-end and coordinate any necessary changes with payroll and HR. Prepare managers to explain changes consistently and follow revised work practices. AB 1331: Workplace Bathroom Surveillance Restrictions AB 1331 addresses employers’ use of workplace surveillance tools in bathrooms, with limited exceptions involving specified access, identification, safety, and availability circumstances. The practical review extends beyond fixed cameras. Connected devices, audio capabilities, wearable technology, and access systems may require attention. What employers should do: Inventory relevant tools and review what they collect, where collection occurs, and how they are used. Align written policies with actual practices and require appropriate review before managers introduce new monitoring methods. AB 1803: California Anti-Hate Speech Training Requirements for 2028 Effective January 1, 2028, AB 1803 requires anti-hate speech content within California’s required sexual harassment training for supervisors and employees. The content must provide practical guidance on recognizing, reporting, and confronting speech that vilifies, humiliates, or incites hatred based on protected characteristics. It does not require a separate standalone course or change the minimum training durations. Employers can use the preparation period to review their training examples and reporting guidance. Managers need to understand how to respond when they witness inappropriate conduct or receive a concern. What employers should do: Review training content against the new requirement and reinforce the actions employees and supervisors should take when concerns arise. What Employers Outside California Can Learn Employers with California employees should assess which requirements apply to their workforce and locations. For organizations without California employees, these developments provide useful questions for reviewing management practices: • Who independently reviews technology-generated employment recommendations? • Do managers know how to receive concerns without discouraging employees from speaking up? • Are leave policies clear enough to guide actual requests? • Do employees understand retention and repayment terms? • Has the organization reviewed what workplace monitoring tools collect? These are broader management considerations. They do not mean California requirements apply nationwide. California Employment Law Changes for 2027 and Employment Law Training for Leaders For many employers, the practical challenge is not simply updating policies. Leaders need to understand how new requirements affect the decisions they make every day. Training can help managers recognize risk, respond appropriately, document concerns, and know when to involve HR. Effective preparation connects legal changes with realistic workplace situations: a supervisor receiving a sensitive complaint, a manager reviewing an automated performance score, or a leader responding to an unfamiliar leave request. How Talent Authority Can Help with California Employment Law Changes Talent Authority’s Employment Law for Leaders: 10 Practices to Reduce Risk incorporates these updates alongside practical guidance on documentation, employee relations, privacy, leave, wage and hour concerns, and when to involve HR. The purpose is to help leaders recognize risk and support consistent, compliant practices within their role. Talent Authority’s Harassment Prevention for Leaders connects harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and workplace respect with the leader’s responsibility to recognize concerns, respond appropriately, and partner with HR. As employers prepare for 2027, each applicable change should have an implementation owner, a deadline, and a clear explanation for the managers who will put it into practice. This article provides general educational information and is not legal advice. Employers should consult qualified counsel about requirements applicable to their organization.

California employment law changes for 2027 will affect how employers use artificial intelligence, administer leave, structure retention agreements, manage compensation, and monitor employees.  Additional requirements have later effective dates, making a clear implementation timeline essential.


For HR leaders, preparation extends beyond revising policies. Managers need to understand how the changes affect their everyday decisions, conversations, documentation, and responsibility to involve HR.


A policy may establish the requirements, but a supervisor’s response to an employee concern, leave request, or performance issue determines how those requirements are applied.


Employers outside California can also use these developments to examine their management practices. The legal obligations are jurisdiction-specific, while questions about human judgment, workplace privacy, consistent treatment, and employee communication have broader relevance.

 

Key California Employment Law Changes for 2027


  • AI employment decisions and human review

  • technology-related workforce displacement

  • immigration-related retaliation protections

  • bereavement leave

  • retention and repayment agreements

  • pay data reporting

  • minimum wage changes

  • workplace surveillance

  • anti-hate speech training effective in 2028

 

SB 947: California AI Employment Decisions and Human Review


Effective July 1, 2027, SB 947, known as the “No Robo Bosses Act,” limits employers’ reliance on automated decision systems in employment decisions.


For disciplinary and termination decisions, the law requires a human reviewer to conduct an independent investigation and compile corroborating information. Employers cannot rely on an automated output that cannot be corroborated or that the reviewer determines is inaccurate or misleading. The law also addresses employee notices and restrictions involving protected characteristics and the exercise of legal rights.


The management implication is significant: human review needs to involve an actual evaluation of the information.


An automated score may flag a performance concern without accounting for incomplete records, inconsistent assignments, or circumstances affecting an employee’s work. Managers need to understand the facts supporting a recommendation before acting on it.


What employers should do: Identify tools that generate employee scores, classifications, or recommendations. Establish who reviews their output, what information supports the review, and how the resulting decision is documented.

 

SB 951: Technology Displacement Notices and Workforce Planning


SB 951 adds notice requirements for covered mass layoffs, relocations, or terminations caused wholly or partly by artificial intelligence or other automated technology.


The required information addresses the affected workers, their locations and job functions, and the technology contributing to the displacement.


For employers considering automation, this connects technology planning with workforce planning. HR needs visibility into proposed changes early enough to assess employee impact and applicable notice requirements.


What employers should do: Include HR in discussions about automation before implementation decisions are finalized. Coordinate technology, staffing, communication, and legal review rather than treating each as a separate project.

 

AB 2495: Immigration-Related Retaliation and Employee Rights


AB 2495 expands protections against unfair immigration-related practices connected to employees’ exercise or attempted exercise of rights under applicable local, state, or federal law.


Protected activities include making good-faith complaints, seeking information about legal compliance, and informing another person about potential rights and remedies. The protections also address conduct related to perceived immigration status that could reasonably discourage someone from exercising a legal right.


Managers need to understand that their response to a concern can create additional risk. Frustration, dismissive comments, or attempts to discourage a complaint can undermine an organization’s reporting process.


What employers should do: Reinforce expectations for receiving concerns, documenting them appropriately, protecting employees from retaliation, and involving HR. Use realistic scenarios to help managers practice responding when they feel challenged or disagree with an employee.

 

SB 1149: California Bereavement Leave for a Designated Person


SB 1149 expands California bereavement leave to include a designated person—someone related to the employee not by blood or whose association with the employee is equivalent to a family relationship.


This change warrants a review of policies that rely on the previous list of covered family members. Request forms and manager guidance may also need revision.

The leadership implication is straightforward: managers should avoid deciding whether a relationship qualifies based on their own assumptions about family.


What employers should do: Update applicable policy language and establish a clear process for evaluating requests. Prepare managers to respond sensitively and obtain eligibility guidance from HR.

 

AB 1697: Stay-or-Pay Agreements, Retention Incentives, and PTO


AB 1697 revises California’s restrictions on certain repayment arrangements, including financial incentives used to recruit or retain workers.


The revised framework addresses incentives offered during employment and includes conditions involving separate agreements, repayment proration, retention periods, an option to defer payment, and specified separation circumstances. It also establishes a limited framework for repayment of advanced paid time off.


These arrangements require careful review because a familiar bonus document or PTO policy may not satisfy the applicable conditions.


Employees also need a clear explanation of what they are accepting. When does a payment become fully earned? What could trigger repayment? How would the amount be calculated?


What employers should do: Review existing agreements with qualified counsel and align manager explanations with the written terms. Avoid informal promises about repayment obligations or exceptions.

 

SB 1237: California Pay Data Reporting Penalties


California employers subject to pay data reporting requirements should prepare for expanded reporting categories affecting reports due in May 2027.


SB 1237 also increases the potential penalty for subsequent reporting violations from $200 to $1,000 per employee. The initial-violation penalty remains $100 per employee.

Accurate reporting depends on coordination among HR, payroll, and the people responsible for workforce data. Waiting until the filing deadline approaches can leave little time to resolve inconsistent classifications or missing information.


What employers should do: Assign ownership, review job-category mapping, and confirm how required information is collected and maintained.

 

California Minimum Wage Changes for 2027


California’s statewide minimum wage increases to $17.40 per hour on January 1, 2027, with a corresponding annual salary threshold of $72,384 for the exempt classifications tied to that calculation.


Employers should also review applicable local wage requirements and any industry-specific rules.


Changes in pay or classification may affect scheduling, timekeeping, and manager expectations. Meeting a salary threshold alone does not resolve every classification question.


What employers should do: Review affected employees before year-end and coordinate any necessary changes with payroll and HR. Prepare managers to explain changes consistently and follow revised work practices.

 

AB 1331: Workplace Bathroom Surveillance Restrictions


AB 1331 addresses employers’ use of workplace surveillance tools in bathrooms, with limited exceptions involving specified access, identification, safety, and availability circumstances.


The practical review extends beyond fixed cameras. Connected devices, audio capabilities, wearable technology, and access systems may require attention.


What employers should do: Inventory relevant tools and review what they collect, where collection occurs, and how they are used. Align written policies with actual practices and require appropriate review before managers introduce new monitoring methods.

 

AB 1803: California Anti-Hate Speech Training Requirements for 2028


Effective January 1, 2028, AB 1803 requires anti-hate speech content within California’s required sexual harassment training for supervisors and employees.


The content must provide practical guidance on recognizing, reporting, and confronting speech that vilifies, humiliates, or incites hatred based on protected characteristics. It does not require a separate standalone course or change the minimum training durations.


Employers can use the preparation period to review their training examples and reporting guidance. Managers need to understand how to respond when they witness inappropriate conduct or receive a concern.


What employers should do: Review training content against the new requirement and reinforce the actions employees and supervisors should take when concerns arise.


What Employers Outside California Can Learn


Employers with California employees should assess which requirements apply to their workforce and locations.


For organizations without California employees, these developments provide useful questions for reviewing management practices:


  • Who independently reviews technology-generated employment recommendations?

  • Do managers know how to receive concerns without discouraging employees from speaking up?

  • Are leave policies clear enough to guide actual requests?

  • Do employees understand retention and repayment terms?

  • Has the organization reviewed what workplace monitoring tools collect?


These are broader management considerations. They do not mean California requirements apply nationwide.

 

California Employment Law Changes for 2027 and Employment Law Training for Leaders


For many employers, the practical challenge is not simply updating policies. Leaders need to understand how new requirements affect the decisions they make every day. Training can help managers recognize risk, respond appropriately, document concerns, and know when to involve HR.


Effective preparation connects legal changes with realistic workplace situations: a supervisor receiving a sensitive complaint, a manager reviewing an automated performance score, or a leader responding to an unfamiliar leave request.

 

How Talent Authority Can Help with California Employment Law Changes


Talent Authority’s Employment Law for Leaders: 10 Practices to Reduce Risk incorporates these updates alongside practical guidance on documentation, employee relations, privacy, leave, wage and hour concerns, and when to involve HR.

The purpose is to help leaders recognize risk and support consistent, compliant practices within their role.


Talent Authority’s Harassment Prevention for Leaders connects harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and workplace respect with the leader’s responsibility to recognize concerns, respond appropriately, and partner with HR.


As employers prepare for 2027, each applicable change should have an implementation owner, a deadline, and a clear explanation for the managers who will put it into practice.

 

 

This article provides general educational information and is not legal advice. Employers should consult qualified counsel about requirements applicable to their organization.

 

 

Comments

bottom of page