California Labor Code and Sexual Harassment: Key Provisions to Know

California has some of the strongest workplace protections in the country, and sexual harassment law sits near the top of that list. Most people think of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, or FEHA, when they hear about harassment suits, and for good reason. FEHA is the backbone of sexual harassment enforcement in the state. But the Labor Code, the Government Code, recent case law, and agency regulations all interact in ways that matter to employees, managers, HR professionals, and business owners. Understanding the interplay helps you recognize issues early, prevent harm, and respond decisively when a complaint lands on your desk.

The legal definition is broader than many expect. California sexual harassment laws do not require an intent to harm, and they cover more than overt propositions. Under California’s Government Code section 12940, harassment is unwelcome conduct because of sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, or related medical conditions. The harasser can be a supervisor, a coworker, a client, a vendor, or any third party who interacts with the workplace.

Courts recognize two principal forms. Quid pro quo harassment in California involves conditioning job benefits on submitting to sexual conduct, or punishing an employee for refusing. A supervisor who ties a raise, a favorable schedule, or continued employment to sexual favors fits this category, even if the request is subtle or one time. Hostile work environment in California covers severe or pervasive unwelcome conduct that alters working conditions and creates an abusive environment. This can include verbal sexual harassment, physical sexual harassment, graphic images, lewd jokes, repeated unwanted advances at work, or targeted comments about someone’s gender or sexual orientation.

California law goes a step further than the federal standard. One offensive incident can be enough if it is especially severe, for example, sexual assault or an explicit quid pro quo proposition from a person with authority. The victim does not need to show a loss of pay or demotion. Emotional distress, humiliation, or interference with work can establish harm. And the standard is whether a reasonable person in the victim’s position would find the environment hostile, not whether the workplace is unbearable to everyone.

FEHA, codified at Government Code section 12940 and following, prohibits harassment and makes employers responsible for preventing and correcting it. The statute applies to employers with one or more employees for harassment claims, and it extends protections to employees, job applicants, unpaid interns, volunteers, and contractors in many scenarios. On top of FEHA, several Labor Code sections create related rights that often travel with sexual harassment cases.

Labor Code section 1102.5 prohibits retaliation against workers who report suspected violations of law. If an employee complains about sexual harassment or reports conduct to HR, the California Civil Rights Department, or the EEOC, 1102.5 can provide a separate path to damages for retaliation. Labor Code section 98.6 protects employees who assert workplace rights, for example, by requesting leave to address trauma or refusing to sign unlawful documents. If a worker files a sexual harassment complaint and is fired shortly after, those Labor Code protections may apply in addition to FEHA’s anti-retaliation rules.

Several newer Labor Code provisions govern nondisclosure terms. At settlement, California Code of Civil Procedure section 1001 and Government Code section 12964.5 limit confidentiality that would silence plaintiffs from discussing factual information related to sexual harassment, discrimination, or retaliation. Employers can protect dollar figures, but cannot require secrecy about facts. Labor Code section 432.3 restricts certain hiring practices, and while not specific to harassment, it often appears in the same disputes and discovery. These rules shift leverage during settlement discussions and should be considered early.

Examples make the thresholds clearer. A supervisor who suggests a promotion if a worker goes on a date is engaging in quid pro quo harassment, even if no explicit mention of sexual acts occurs. A coworker who sends daily explicit messages, comments about body parts, or repeatedly “accidentally” touches someone may create a hostile work environment. Third party harassment in California is real: a repeat offender customer who pinches or makes vulgar comments triggers employer duties to act, even though the harasser is not on payroll.

Edge cases are common. A single off-color remark often does not meet the “severe or pervasive” threshold, but the context and power dynamics matter. A supervisor’s isolated but explicit sexual proposition can be severe enough on its own. Likewise, a pattern of smaller incidents, eyeing a worker up and down, comments about clothing, using a nickname with sexual overtones, can add up over weeks or months. A disciplined investigation looks at frequency, severity, whether conduct was physical or verbal, whether it was humiliating or threatening, and whether it interfered with work.

FEHA places a nondelegable duty on employers to take all reasonable steps to prevent and correct harassment. That phrase has bite. Employers must have a written harassment, discrimination, and retaliation prevention policy. It needs to be distributed in a way employees can understand, including translations for languages spoken by at least 10 percent of the workforce. The policy must outline how to report, identify two or more avenues to complain including a method that bypasses a direct supervisor, explain the investigation process, promise confidentiality to the extent possible, commit to timely investigations, and pledge corrective action if misconduct occurred. California sexual harassment policy requirements are detailed in regulations issued by the Civil Rights Department.

Training is mandatory. Under Government Code section 12950.1, expanded by SB 1343, employers with five or more employees must provide sexual harassment training: at least two hours for supervisors, and at least one hour for nonsupervisory employees, every two years and within six months of hire or promotion. AB 1825 was the earlier training mandate, later expanded by SB 1343 to cover smaller employers and nonsupervisory staff. Content must cover FEHA sexual harassment definitions, real-world examples, retaliation, bystander strategies, and supervisor duties. Interactive training is strongly encouraged, and many employers use certified online modules to meet the standard.

Employer liability for sexual harassment in California depends on who harassed and what the employer did next. If a supervisor harasses an employee and the harassment results in a tangible employment action such as firing, demotion, or a pay cut, liability is strict. If there is no tangible job action, the employer can still be liable, but the defense focuses on whether the company exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct harassment and whether the employee unreasonably failed to use the complaint procedures. For coworker or third party harassment, the question is whether the employer knew or should have known and failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action. The bench test is reasonableness: document the steps, the timing, and the follow-through.

Employees often ask how to file a sexual harassment complaint in California when they fear retaliation. California law prohibits retaliation for reporting sexual harassment. FEHA, the Labor Code, and whistleblower statutes overlap here. Internal reporting is not required to preserve FEHA rights if the employer has no proper policy or if the conduct involves a supervisor and the worker reasonably fears futility. That said, prompt internal reporting can stop harm and build a record. For external reporting, the California Civil Rights Department sexual harassment intake process allows online, phone, or mail submissions. The CRD formerly operated under the DFEH name, so you may see references to a DFEH sexual harassment complaint. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission accepts charges as well. Agencies often cross-file.

Once an employer receives a report, speed matters. In my experience, the most defensible investigations launch within one to three days for standard cases, sooner for physical conduct or ongoing exposure. Appoint a neutral investigator. In larger companies, that might be HR; in complex or senior-leadership matters, an outside investigator trained in trauma-informed interviewing is a safer choice. Explain confidentiality boundaries to participants. Interview the complainant first, then the alleged harasser, then witnesses. Secure relevant documents, emails, messages, and any video footage. Maintain a clean chain of custody for evidence. Make preliminary safety adjustments, for example schedule changes or leave, without reducing the complainant’s pay or status. Retaliation often shows up here, through isolation or schedule cuts dressed up as operational needs. Train managers to avoid any adverse action against participants without HR review.

The written investigative report should make factual findings based on a preponderance of evidence. It should not bury conclusions in euphemisms. If policy violations occurred, corrective action needs to match the findings. That could range from training and a final warning to termination. For third party harassment, corrective action might include barring a customer from the premises, changing the client’s account assignment, or working through the vendor’s management to remove the individual.

California sexual harassment statute of limitations rules changed recently. For many FEHA claims, the deadline to file an administrative complaint with the CRD is generally three years from the last unlawful act, extended from the historical one-year period. After the CRD issues a right-to-sue notice, the employee typically has one year to file a civil lawsuit. Retaliation claims under Labor Code 1102.5 carry their own statute of limitations, which can be at least one year and, in some contexts, longer depending on the remedy sought and the forum. Tort claims like sexual battery or assault have separate timelines. When in doubt, treat the shortest plausible deadline as the working date and consult counsel promptly. Agencies do allow equitable tolling in narrow situations, but planning around that is a mistake.

California expanded coverage beyond traditional W-2 employees. FEHA protects unpaid interns and volunteers, sexual harassment california and the law prohibits harassment against persons providing services under a contract. That means independent contractor sexual harassment in California can trigger employer duties if the conduct occurs in the workplace or in connection with the work relationship. In staffing arrangements or franchised operations, joint employer analysis often determines who bears responsibility. If multiple entities control workplace conditions, both can be liable. Contracts that assign harassment prevention duties are helpful but not a shield when day-to-day control tells a different story.

Sexual harassment evidence in California cases often includes messages, emails, calendar invitations, social media direct messages, security footage, and timekeeping records. Patterns matter. Was the alleged harasser scheduled on the same shifts as the complainant right after a rejection? Did performance write-ups start only after the complaint? Preserve phones and work devices. Do not wipe or reissue a laptop until legal and HR confirm a full forensic image. Witnesses who saw demeanor changes or were present for jokes or comments can be powerful, even if they did not hear every word.

An overlooked category is contemporaneous reports. A text to a friend, an email to self, or a note to HR made on or near the date of an incident supports credibility because it shows consistency. On the defense side, contemporaneous coaching records, timely responses, and discipline applied consistently across roles help show the employer took reasonable steps.

If liability is established, available sexual harassment damages in California can include back pay, front pay, emotional distress, and sometimes punitive damages where the conduct was malicious or oppressive. FEHA allows recovery of attorney’s fees and costs to a prevailing plaintiff, which changes the settlement calculus. In smaller cases, emotional distress often drives value. In larger ones, economic losses tied to wrongful termination or constructive dismissal can dwarf other categories.

California sexual harassment settlements commonly include policy improvements, training commitments, a neutral reference, and non-disparagement clauses with state-mandated carveouts that preserve the right to talk about unlawful workplace acts. Since 2019, California restricts confidentiality of facts related to sexual harassment and discrimination. Employers can keep settlement amounts confidential, but not gag a worker from discussing what happened. Mediation is frequent. The California sexual harassment mediation process can occur at the CRD, through private mediators, or as part of court-sponsored programs. Arbitration clauses appear in many employment agreements. Some claims, especially FEHA-based harassment and retaliation, may be compelled to arbitration depending on contract language and evolving California law around enforceability. Plaintiffs and employers should evaluate whether arbitration or court best suits the case profile, considering privacy, appeal rights, and cost.

Compliance training is a floor, not a ceiling. The law requires California sexual harassment training for employers with five or more employees. Deliver the two-hour supervisory and one-hour nonsupervisory modules every two years, track completions, and retrain promptly after promotions or rehires. But compliance does not automatically prevent harassment. In operations-heavy settings like restaurants, retail, and warehouses, third party harassment is common. Frontline managers need scripts and authority to remove customers who cross lines. In professional services, remote and hybrid arrangements moved misconduct into digital channels. Policies should expressly cover messaging platforms, video calls, and off-hours communications tied to work.

When I audit programs, I focus on five items that correlate with fewer claims and faster resolutions:

A note on small employers. Even with fewer than five employees, the harassment provisions of FEHA still apply. The training mandate may not, but the duty to prevent and correct harassment does. Do not assume size equals immunity.

Retaliation claims often decide the case value. California sexual harassment retaliation occurs when an employer takes adverse action because a worker complained, participated in an investigation, or opposed unlawful conduct. Adverse action includes firing, demotion, schedule cuts, prized assignment removal, location transfers that increase commute, or excluding the worker from meetings and opportunities. Retaliation can be subtle. Management emails that suggest the complainant is “not a team player,” performance plans rolled out days after a report, or moving the complainant to a back office “for their own safety” without consent can all be evidence.

Constructive dismissal arises when the working conditions become so intolerable that a reasonable person would feel compelled to resign. In the harassment context, a failure to separate the harasser, refusal to address ongoing misconduct, or punitive schedule changes can tip a resignation into constructive termination. That brings wrongful termination sexual harassment California claims into play, with associated economic damages.

The California Civil Rights Department accepts complaints online. The process typically starts with an intake questionnaire, then a staff interview to refine the allegations. The CRD can mediate, investigate, or issue a right-to-sue letter. The EEOC sexual harassment process is similar, and the agencies often cross-file to preserve federal and state rights. Exhaustion of administrative remedies is required for FEHA claims, which is legal shorthand for filing with the CRD or EEOC before suing in court. If a complainant wants to proceed directly to court, they can often request an immediate right-to-sue notice, but it forecloses an agency investigation. Choosing between investigation and immediate litigation depends on evidence strength, employer posture, and the complainant’s goals.

Many California employees signed arbitration agreements. California sexual harassment arbitration is enforceable in many scenarios, although certain limitations apply, and the legal landscape evolves as courts weigh state rules against federal arbitration law. Arbitration can be faster and private, but it reduces appellate options and sometimes increases upfront fees. For employers, the cost of arbitrator time and rules requiring the company to pay those fees can make arbitration pricier than state court. For employees, privacy can cut both ways, offering discretion but reducing public pressure.

California’s legislative trend favors transparency. Laws limit nondisclosure of facts in settlements. The Silenced No More Act expands protection for employees who speak about harassment and discrimination. Non-disparagement clauses must include specific carveout language allowing employees to discuss unlawful acts. Employers should revisit template agreements. Plaintiffs should understand what they can say publicly after settlement and what remains confidential.

A California sexual harassment case timeline varies. Internal investigations can wrap within two to six weeks for straightforward matters. CRD processing ranges from a few weeks to several months, depending on backlog and whether mediation is requested. Litigation in state court often takes 12 to 24 months to reach trial. Arbitration tends to move faster, sometimes resolving within 9 to 15 months. Discovery presents bottlenecks around device imaging, third party subpoenas, and privacy objections. Early preservation notices help avoid spoliation fights.

Mediation can occur early, sometimes pre-litigation through the CRD, or later after key depositions. Cases with strong documents, like explicit texts, settle earlier and for more. Cases that hinge on credibility may benefit from limited discovery to test narratives before mediation.

A California sexual harassment attorney or sexual harassment lawyer in California helps triage facts, preserve evidence, and navigate procedural traps like filing deadlines. On the defense side, counsel crafts investigation parameters, advises on interim measures, and manages communications that avoid admissions while keeping trust with the workforce. On the plaintiff side, counsel assesses damages, coordinates medical or therapy records where appropriate, and negotiates Employment Law Lawyers California settlement terms that protect future employment prospects. If the case heads to court or arbitration, counsel steers expert selection, from vocational experts to mental health professionals.

Here is a concise, practical list to keep handy. It is not a substitute for legal advice, but it reflects what tends to matter most.

California workplace harassment laws are robust and precise. FEHA sexual harassment rules, California Labor Code anti-retaliation and anti-secrecy provisions, and agency regulations together create a clear framework: prevent, train, provide safe reporting channels, investigate quickly, correct decisively, and protect participants from retaliation. For employees, understanding what is considered sexual harassment in California and the reporting sexual harassment California process lowers the barrier to speaking up. For employers, investing in policy, training, and clean investigations is not just compliance, it is risk control and culture building.

Sexual harassment claim California disputes rarely hinge on a single policy page. They turn on human details: who listened, who acted, how fast, and whether the response matched the harm. Get those parts right, and you honor both the law and the people it was designed to protect.