California Assembly Bill AB51

California 2019-2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/3/18
• Refer: 1/17/19
• Report Pass: 3/7/19
• Refer: 3/7/19
• Report Pass: 3/25/19
• Refer: 3/27/19
• Refer: 4/10/19
• Report Pass: 5/16/19
• Engrossed: 5/22/19
• Refer: 5/23/19
• Refer: 5/29/19
• Report Pass: 6/19/19
• Refer: 6/19/19
• Report Pass: 7/10/19
• Refer: 7/10/19
• Refer: 8/12/19
• Report Pass: 8/30/19
• Enrolled: 9/13/19
• Chaptered: 10/10/19
• Passed: 10/10/19

Caption

Employment discrimination: enforcement.

Impact

The bill represents a significant shift in California labor law, reinforcing protections against employment practices perceived as coercive. By classifying such waiver requirements as unlawful employment practices under FEHA, AB51 aims to empower employees and enhance their ability to challenge discriminatory practices without fear of retaliation. The legislation aligns with the state's broader objective of promoting a fair and equitable workplace environment, emphasizing voluntary consent in employment contracts.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 51, also known as AB51, aims to enhance employment rights in California by prohibiting employers from requiring employees or job applicants to waive any rights or procedures established under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) as a condition of employment. This includes rights related to filing civil actions for alleged violations of employment laws. The bill seeks to prevent coercive practices that could undermine individuals' legal rights concerning employment-related grievances.

Sentiment

Overall sentiment surrounding AB51 is generally positive among employee rights advocates and labor organizations, who see it as a vital step in protecting workers from unfair practices. However, some business groups may perceive the bill as an undue burden, arguing that it could complicate employment contracts and increase legal liabilities for employers. The discourse highlights a tension between enhancing employee protections and maintaining employer flexibility within labor agreements.

Contention

Notable points of contention include concerns from critics regarding the potential chilling effect on employment negotiations and the implications of additional legal burdens on employers. Some stakeholders argue that while the intention of the bill is to prevent discrimination, its implementation could lead to excessive litigation and unintended consequences that complicate employer-employee relations, particularly in negotiations of contracts and severance agreements.