AB 475 amends Penal Code section 2700 to remove the statutory duty for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) to require able-bodied inmates to work. Instead, the bill directs CDCR to design voluntary work programs, to adopt rules for voluntary work assignments including wages, and it requires county and city jurisdictions to set compensation for jail-based work through local ordinance.
The measure also includes a prospective prohibition: on and after January 1, 2027, CDCR may not require incarcerated people to work except as the bill otherwise specifies. Because the bill forces local governments to adopt ordinances for jail pay, it creates a state-mandated local program and invokes the statutory reimbursement procedure if the Commission on State Mandates finds costs are imposed on local agencies.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill removes the statutory requirement that CDCR force able-bodied inmates to work, replacing it with a directive to establish voluntary work programs and to set wages for those assignments. For county and city jails, compensation must be set by local ordinance. It also bars CDCR from requiring incarcerated persons to work beginning January 1, 2027, subject to the bill's limited exceptions.
Who It Affects
CDCR and its institutional operations, county sheriffs and city jails that run work crews, local legislative bodies that must adopt ordinances, correctional industries and contractors that use incarcerated labor, and incarcerated individuals whose work status and pay will change.
Why It Matters
The bill flips the presumption inside California correctional policy from compulsory to voluntary labor, altering staffing, programming incentives, and revenue models tied to inmate labor. It also shifts an administrative decision (jail pay rates) to local elected bodies and creates potential fiscal obligations for counties and cities.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Under current California law the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has a statutory duty to require able-bodied inmates to work; CDCR regulations in practice also tie participation in programming, including labor, to privileges and earned good-conduct credit. AB 475 eliminates that statutory duty in Penal Code section 2700 and directs CDCR to build a voluntary work program instead.
The department must write rules and regulations governing voluntary assignments and must set wages for work assignments that occur within state prison facilities.
For jails run by counties or cities, the bill shifts a central decision—how much incarcerated people are paid—to local elected bodies: wages must be established by ordinance. The bill labels that change a state-mandated local program, triggering the Commission on State Mandates process for any required reimbursements.
Practically, that means boards of supervisors and city councils must act to codify compensation schedules or else jail work programs will operate without the statutory wage framework AB 475 contemplates.The bill includes an explicit effective constraint: as of January 1, 2027, CDCR may not require incarcerated persons to work, except where the bill itself provides otherwise. The text does not enumerate broad new exceptions in the amended section, which leaves unresolved how existing regulatory sanctions tied to nonparticipation—such as loss of privileges or good-conduct credits under CDCR regulations—will interact with the new statutory baseline.
Agencies will need to reconcile the statutory change with existing regulatory practices and with any collective-bargaining or contracting arrangements that rely on inmate labor.Implementation will create a mix of administrative tasks: CDCR must draft and adopt regulations for voluntary assignments and wages; local governments must draft ordinances and decide compensation policy; and correctional programs that historically relied on mandatory labor will need to redesign participation incentives if they expect to maintain the same levels of work output. The bill also creates an uneven landscape of pay and practices across jurisdictions because local ordinances can set differing wage levels for similar work in county jails.
The Five Things You Need to Know
AB 475 amends Penal Code §2700 to remove the statutory duty for CDCR to require able-bodied inmates to work.
The bill requires CDCR to develop voluntary work programs and to prescribe rules and regulations governing voluntary work assignments, including wages for those assignments.
For county and city jail work programs, the bill requires compensation to be established by local ordinance rather than by state regulation.
The bill bars CDCR from requiring incarcerated persons to work on or after January 1, 2027, except as otherwise specified in the statute.
Because the bill forces local wage ordinances for jail labor, it creates a state-mandated local program subject to reimbursement if the Commission on State Mandates finds costs are imposed on local agencies.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Removes statutory duty to require work
The amendment strikes the language that obligates CDCR to require each able-bodied inmate, including condemned inmates, to work. That is the core statutory change: the state no longer imposes a prescriptive, across-the-board work mandate on inmates. For prison administrators this removes the statutory foundation for mandatory assignment policies and opens the door to reclassifying labor as voluntary.
Directs CDCR to create voluntary work programs and set wages
Instead of a requirement to compel labor, CDCR must now design voluntary work programs and adopt rules and regulations covering voluntary work assignments. The statute explicitly contemplates that CDCR will set wages for work assignments in state prisons. Practically, CDCR must move from enforcing participation toward designing incentives, application processes, assignment eligibility, and pay scales that the department can defend administratively and legally.
Local ordinances set jail worker compensation
The bill takes the wage-setting decision for jail labor out of state regulation and places it with local legislative bodies. Boards of supervisors and city councils must pass ordinances to establish compensation for county and city jail work programs. That creates a statutory obligation for local governments to act and could produce widely varying pay rates across jurisdictions, with attendant budgetary and policy consequences.
Prohibition on compelled work (effective Jan 1, 2027) and mandate/reimbursement notice
AB 475 contains a date-driven prohibition: on and after January 1, 2027 CDCR may not require incarcerated persons to work, except where the statute specifies otherwise. The bill also flags that its local-ordinance requirement constitutes a state-mandated local program and points to the statutory reimbursement process through the Commission on State Mandates if costs are imposed on counties and cities.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Criminal Justice across all five countries.
Explore Criminal Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Incarcerated people: Gain formal statutory protection against compelled work and the right to participate in work programs on a voluntary basis, which could reduce coercive labor practices and give individuals greater choice.
- Local elected officials and counties/cities: Receive clear authority to set pay for jail work through ordinance, allowing elected bodies to align compensation with local budgets and policy priorities.
- Civil rights and prisoner-advocacy organizations: Gain a statutory change they can use to press for voluntary programming, higher pay, or additional safeguards in practice and regulation.
Who Bears the Cost
- CDCR: Must design, regulate, and potentially fund voluntary work programs and administer new wage-setting responsibilities for state prison assignments, requiring staff time and regulatory drafting.
- Counties and cities: Face an administrative requirement to adopt ordinances and potential fiscal exposure if they set higher compensation; the state-mandate finding process could shift some costs but not immediately resolve local budget pressure.
- Agencies and contractors that rely on low-cost inmate labor (public works crews, correctional industries): May lose dependable, low-cost labor pools or face higher labor costs if jurisdictions increase pay or if voluntary participation falls.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between eliminating coercive labor practices and preserving the operational, rehabilitative, and fiscal benefits that inmate labor has provided: making work voluntary protects individual autonomy and reduces the risk of exploitation, but it also reduces the state's ability to staff essential tasks, may raise costs for prisons and localities, and forces policymakers to choose between funding programs or accepting lower participation and output.
AB 475 makes a discrete statutory swap—mandatory work out, voluntary programs and local wage-setting in—but it leaves several consequential implementation questions open. The bill does not explicitly repeal CDCR's existing regulations that tie program participation to privileges or good-conduct credits; regulators will have to reconcile those rules with the new statutory baseline or face legal challenges.
That creates immediate uncertainty for corrections administrators about whether refusal to participate can continue to factor into disciplinary or credit-earning regimes.
The local-ordinance approach to jail wages introduces variation and fiscal stress. Jurisdictions that choose higher pay will increase local costs for jail programs and for any public works that use jail crews; those that set lower pay risk criticism and potential litigation.
The requirement triggers the state-mandated local program apparatus but that reimbursement process is slow and litigable, so counties may bear costs in the near term. Finally, shifting from mandatory to voluntary labor changes the incentive structure inside facilities: programs that previously relied on compelled participation will need to redesign enrollment, supervision, and training to maintain outputs—raising questions about recidivism outcomes and program financing that the bill does not address.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.