Follow us on LinkedIn to see future News.
December 10, 2025
Heading into 2026, some notable updates exist to the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) about which employers should know and for which they should prepare.
The FEHA prohibits workplace discrimination based on sex, age, disability, medical condition, sexual orientation, and marital status, and includes harassment prevention training requirements. California’s law is generally more expansive than federal standards.
Added Protections to Bring Civil Rights Claims
Under current California law, employees may bring a claim in a court of competent jurisdiction under the FEHA only after exhausting their administrative remedies with the California Civil Rights Department (CRD). After filing a Complaint with the CRD, an employee can either request an immediate right-to-sue from the CRD and proceed to file a lawsuit or have the CRD investigate the allegations of the Complaint. If the CRD provides written notice that it has closed its investigation, an employee has one year to file a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction.
Effective January 1, 2026, Senate Bill 477 will toll the time for an employee to file a civil action while the employee timely appeals the closure of their Complaint to the CRD. The employee will have one year to file after the CRD issues written notice that the case will remain closed following a notice of appeal.
Further, SB 477 adds a definition of “group or class complaint” to the FEHA to be “any complaint alleging a pattern or practice.”
Immunity for Bias Mitigation Training
Also effective January 1, 2026, Senate Bill 303 amends the FEHA so that, as a matter of law, an employee’s assessment, testing, admission, or acknowledgment of their own personal bias—when made in good faith as part of a bias mitigation training—does not, by itself, constitute unlawful discrimination.
The purpose of the amendment is to encourage employers to conduct bias mitigation training (e.g., self-reflection exercises, workshops, and facilitated discussions) and to affirm that conducting such training does not, by itself, constitute unlawful discrimination.
Employers should carefully review any bias training programs to reflect the amendment and make any necessary updates in process, structure, and implementation.
The author of this article, Andrew DeLucia, is a member of the Bars of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. This article is designed to provide one perspective regarding recent legal developments, and is not intended to serve as legal advice in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, California or any other jurisdiction, nor does it establish an attorney-client relationship with any reader of the article where one does not exist. Always consult an attorney with specific legal issues.
