SB 294 creates the Workplace Know Your Rights Act, adding a new Part 5.6 to the California Labor Code. The law requires employers to give every employee a stand‑alone written notice—on or before February 1, 2026, and annually thereafter—describing specified workers’ rights (workers’ compensation, immigration‑inspection notices, protections against immigration‑related unfair practices, union and concerted activity rights, and workplace constitutional rights when interacting with law enforcement).
Employers must also offer an opportunity to designate an emergency contact (with specific notification obligations), keep three years of compliance records, and allow collective bargaining agreements to supersede the law if they do so explicitly.
The Labor Commissioner must publish a plain‑language template notice (by January 1, 2026), update it annually, and produce videos for employees and employers (by July 1, 2026). Enforcement sits primarily with the Labor Commissioner, with alternative enforcement by a public prosecutor; penalties run up to $500 per employee per violation, with emergency‑contact violations fined up to $500 per employee per day (capped at $10,000 per employee).
The law includes language‑access requirements and a nonpreemption clause for local laws that provide equal or greater protections.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires employers to deliver a stand‑alone notice to each worker about specified labor and constitutional rights, keep three years of records, provide an opportunity to name an emergency contact, and follow a Labor Commissioner template available online.
Who It Affects
All California employers and their employees (current and new hires), authorized collective bargaining representatives, the Labor Commissioner’s office, and public prosecutors who may enforce the law.
Why It Matters
It creates mandatory, recurring disclosure duties plus model materials and videos from the Labor Commissioner, introduces a daily penalty for emergency‑contact failures, and adds a new enforcement mechanism that can drive compliance and litigation risk.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 294 requires every employer to give each employee a separate, stand‑alone written notice describing specific workplace rights. The list covers workers’ compensation, notice of immigration agency inspections, protections against immigration‑related unfair practices, rights to organize and engage in concerted activity, and constitutional protections when interacting with law enforcement at work.
Employers must deliver the notice to current employees by February 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, and to new hires at onboarding. The statute limits delivery methods to those the employer normally uses for employment communications and allows personal service, email, or text when the employer can reasonably expect delivery within one business day.
The Labor Commissioner must produce a plain‑language template notice and post it online by January 1, 2026, update it yearly, and make it available in a required set of languages (English, Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Korean, Hindi, Urdu, and Punjabi) with the option to add more. The Commissioner must also produce two videos—one for employees and one for employers—by July 1, 2026, and consult the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, the Public Employment Relations Board, and the Attorney General for suggested language and scripts on organizing and constitutional rights.On emergency contacts, SB 294 requires employers to offer employees the opportunity to name a contact by March 30, 2026 for existing staff and at hire for later hires, to allow updates during employment, and to notify the listed contact if the employee is arrested or detained at the worksite.
If the arrest or detention occurs offsite during work hours or job duties, the employer must notify the contact only if the employer has actual knowledge of the arrest or detention. Employers must retain compliance records (including dates notices were provided) for three years.The bill creates enforcement authority for the Labor Commissioner (using existing Section 98 procedures) and allows public prosecutors to enforce it as an alternative.
Remedies include temporary relief, injunctive relief, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and statutory penalties. The baseline penalty is up to $500 per employee per violation; emergency‑contact violations can be assessed up to $500 per employee per day, capped at $10,000 per employee.
Finally, the statute permits collective bargaining agreements to supersede its requirements only if the waiver is explicit and unambiguous and does not preempt local ordinances that provide equal or greater protections.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Deadline stack: post template by Jan 1, 2026; employer notice to employees by Feb 1, 2026 and annually thereafter; videos by July 1, 2026; emergency‑contact opportunity deadline for existing employees by March 30, 2026.
Template languages: the Labor Commissioner must provide the model notice at minimum in English, Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Korean, Hindi, Urdu, and Punjabi (with optional additional languages).
Recordkeeping: employers must retain compliance records—showing when each written notice was provided—for three years.
Penalties: general violations subject to up to $500 per employee per violation; emergency‑contact violations up to $500 per employee per day, capped at $10,000 per employee; penalties recoverable as statutory or civil penalties but not both for the same violation.
Collective bargaining carve‑out: a collective bargaining agreement may supersede these requirements in whole or part only if it explicitly and unambiguously states the waiver.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Name of the statutory part
Declares the new Part 5.6 as the Workplace Know Your Rights Act. This is the organizational anchor in Division 2 of the Labor Code and signals the statute’s purpose: centralized, statutory recognition that employers must inform employees about specified rights.
Legislative intent
Sets out two policy goals: improving worker understanding of labor and constitutional rights and equipping workers with information useful to their communities in times of disruption. While not enforceable on its own, this intent section frames subsequent provisions and can inform interpretation of ambiguous requirements, such as the scope of 'workers’ rights' disclosures.
Employer notice duty: content, delivery, timing, language, and recordkeeping
Spells out the core employer obligations. Employers must deliver a stand‑alone written notice to each current employee by Feb 1, 2026, and annually after that, and provide it to new hires at onboarding. The notice must describe five categories of rights (workers’ comp, immigration‑inspection notices, protections against unfair immigration‑related practices, organizing/concerted activity rights, and workplace constitutional rights). Delivery must use the employer’s normal communication channels; email, text, or personal service qualify if the employer reasonably expects receipt within one business day. Employers must provide notices in the language they normally use with the employee if the Labor Commissioner’s template is available in that language; otherwise English is acceptable. Employers must keep proof of compliance for three years, including dates notices were provided.
Labor Commissioner template, videos, language access, and consultations
Directs the Labor Commissioner to produce and post a plain‑language template notice by Jan 1, 2026 and update it yearly; the Commissioner must also produce employee and employer videos by July 1, 2026 and post them online. The statute specifies a baseline set of required languages and mandates consultation with the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, the Public Employment Relations Board, and the Attorney General for suggested language and scripts—placing substantive drafting responsibilities on multiple agencies and embedding organizing and constitutional guidance into the materials.
Emergency contact designation and employer notification duties
Requires employers to give employees an opportunity to name a designated emergency contact (existing employees by March 30, 2026; new hires at hire) and to let employees update that information. If an employee elects to have a contact notified, the employer must notify that contact when the employee is arrested or detained on the worksite. For offsite arrests or detentions during work hours or job duties, the employer must notify the contact only if the employer has actual knowledge. The statutory distinction between on‑site arrests (automatic notification) and off‑site incidents (actual knowledge trigger) creates an evidence and operational standard for employers to implement.
Collective bargaining waiver
Allows parties to supersede the law by collective bargaining agreement, but only if the waiver is explicitly and unambiguously stated. This preserves collective bargaining flexibility while requiring clear documentation to remove statutory protections, and it may encourage unions and employers to negotiate notice practices directly into contracts.
Anti‑retaliation protections
Prohibits employers from discharging, threatening, demoting, suspending, or otherwise retaliating against employees for exercising or attempting to exercise rights under the new part, filing complaints, cooperating with enforcement, or assisting in enforcement. It imports the usual protected‑activity framework into enforcement and makes retaliation itself a violation subject to the remedies and penalties of the statute.
Enforcement procedures, remedies, and penalties
Declares primary enforcement by the Labor Commissioner (using existing Section 98 procedures for investigations, temporary relief, citations and civil actions) and grants alternative enforcement to public prosecutors. Remedies include temporary and injunctive relief, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and statutory penalties. The statute sets a general penalty up to $500 per employee per violation and a heightened daily penalty for emergency‑contact failures (up to $500 per employee per day, capped at $10,000 per employee), and it provides venue options for civil actions in superior court.
Nonpreemption of local ordinances
States that the new part does not preempt any city or county ordinance that provides equal or greater employee protections. This preserves stronger local laws and requires employers to track both the state statute and applicable local rules where they operate.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Employment across all five countries.
Explore Employment 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
- Frontline and low‑wage workers — Gains clearer, recurring written notice of specific rights (including workers’ compensation and organizing rights) and a formal avenue to designate an emergency contact, which can reduce confusion after workplace incidents.
- Immigrant and limited English proficient workers — The Labor Commissioner’s mandated translations and explicit protections against immigration‑related unfair practices aim to improve comprehension and reduce vulnerability during immigration inspections.
- Authorized collective bargaining representatives — Employers must provide the notice annually to an employee’s exclusive representative, increasing union access to information and creating a bargaining lever to tailor or replace requirements explicitly.
- Employees’ families and designated emergency contacts — The emergency‑contact notification duty can speed information flow to families when an employee is arrested or detained at worksite, improving safety and crisis response.
Who Bears the Cost
- All California employers — Must implement notice delivery systems, track annual compliance for each employee, provide language‑appropriate notices when templates exist, and create mechanisms to capture and update emergency contact preferences.
- Small and multi‑location employers — Face operational and translation costs, HR system changes, and potential exposure to per‑employee penalties across many locations if notices are missed or emergency‑contact rules are not followed.
- Labor Commissioner’s office — Bears the administrative burden and expense of drafting, translating, updating, posting the template annually, producing videos in multiple languages, and handling an expanded enforcement docket.
- Employers’ HR and legal teams — Must interpret the 'actual knowledge' standard for offsite arrests, maintain records for three years, and defend against citations or civil actions that could include penalties, injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between empowering workers with uniform, recurring notice of rights (and speeding information to families through emergency contacts) and imposing operational, privacy, and liability burdens on employers and regulators; the statute advances worker knowledge and safety at the cost of creating subjective compliance standards, translation and recordkeeping obligations, and a multi‑front enforcement regime that will test administrative capacity and produce litigation over ambiguous triggers like 'reasonably anticipated' delivery and 'actual knowledge.'
SB 294 packs clear requirements into relatively short text, but several operational and legal frictions remain. The statute hinges on delivery standards that are partly subjective: notices may be sent by channels the employer 'normally uses' and by email or text if receipt is 'reasonably anticipated' within one business day.
Employers and regulators will need to define what counts as 'normal' and when anticipation of receipt is reasonable, and those determinations will drive compliance outcomes and litigation strategies. Similarly, the emergency‑contact duty draws a key line between on‑site arrests (automatic notification) and off‑site incidents (actual‑knowledge trigger), but the bill gives no method for documenting or proving a lack of actual knowledge, which could generate disputes over whether the employer should have known.
Translation and accessibility are meaningful benefits but also an implementation challenge. The Labor Commissioner must publish templates in nine named languages, yet employers may still be required to provide notices in additional languages if those materials become available; smaller employers and those with diverse workforces may struggle to match language needs until the Commissioner’s catalog expands.
Enforcement design also raises questions: the statute layers administrative enforcement through Section 98 procedures with alternative public‑prosecutor enforcement and civil actions that permit punitive damages and attorney fees. That range of remedies increases deterrence but also raises uncertainty about penalty calculation, duplication of proceedings, and strategic enforcement by multiple actors.
Finally, the collective bargaining waiver preserves employer‑union flexibility but creates variability in worker protections across workplaces — an explicit waiver clause reduces ambiguity but invites negotiations that may trade statutory notice protections for other terms.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.