Relocations, terminations, and mass layoffs.
Summary
Existing law, the California Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act, governs relocations, terminations, and mass layoffs. Existing law prohibits an employer from ordering a mass layoff, relocation, or termination at a covered establishment unless, 60 days before the order takes effect, the employer gives prescribed written notice of the order to specified entities, including the local workforce investment board and the chief elected official of each city and county government within which the termination, relocation, or mass layoff occurs. Existing law exempts certain types of employment from the act, including seasonal employment where the employees were hired with the understanding that their employment was seasonal and temporary (seasonal employment exemption) . Existing law makes an employer who fails to give notice as required liable to each employee entitled to notice who lost their employment for prescribed compensation, calculated for the period of the employer's violation, up to a maximum of 60 days, or 12 the number of days that the employee was employed by the employer, whichever period is smaller. Existing law authorizes the Labor Commissioner to enforce specified provisions of existing law, as prescribed. Existing law defines terms for its purposes, including definitions for the terms "employer" and "employee." Existing law defines "mass layoff" for purposes of the act to mean a layoff during any 30-day period of 50 or more employees at a covered establishment, and defines "covered establishment" as an industrial or commercial facility that employs, or has employed within the preceding 12 months, 75 or more persons. This bill would require the prescribed notice 75 days before the order takes effect, and would make a conforming change to the calculation of employer liability. The bill would modify the requirement for notice to the local workforce investment board and the chief elected official of each city and county government within which the termination, relocation, or mass layoff occurs to apply only to a termination, relocation, or mass layoff that impacts 50 or more employees at a single location. The bill would require a labor contractor to remit to the employee the payment provided to the client employer in the full amount calculated, as specified, for a violation of the notice requirement, and would define a "labor contractor" for purposes of the act. This bill would additionally require for the application of the seasonal employment exemption that the season be complete. The bill would also exempt from the act employees who are employed by a labor contractor to fulfill the needs of a temporary project with a defined end date and are laid off because of the completion of the temporary employment contract, as specified. This bill would include within the term "employer" a client employer of a labor contractor. The bill would include within the term "employee" a person employed by a labor contractor and performing labor with the client employer for at least 6 months of the 12 months and for at least 60 hours preceding the date on which notice is required. The bill would revise the definition of "covered establishment" to instead mean a place of employment that employs, or has employed within the preceding 12 months, 75 or more persons, and would specify that a "covered establishment" may be a single location or a group of locations, as specified. The bill would revise the definition of "mass layoff" to also include employees reporting to a covered establishment. This bill would prohibit an employer from utilizing compliance with the act in connection with a severance agreement and waiver of an employee's right to claims. The bill would provide that any general release, waiver of claims, or nondisparagement or nondisclosure agreement that is made a condition of the payment of amounts for which the employer is liable is void as a matter of law and against public policy. The bill would prohibit an employer who is required to give notice from offering an employee a separate agreement that includes a general release, waiver of claims, or nondisparagement or nondisclosure agreement, unless the agreement is offered in exchange for reasonable consideration that is in addition to anything of value to which the individual already is entitled and includes a statement to this effect, as specified. The bill would provide that any agreement in violation of this prohibition is void as a matter of law and against public policy, and would make an employer who violates this provision subject to a civil penalty of up to $500 for each violation.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2023
Committee Review
Aug 2023
Assembly Passage
May 2023
Senate Passage
Sep 2023
Vetoed
Jan 2024
Introduced Feb 17, 2023
Vetoed Jan 3, 2024
Floor votes · Senate Sep 11, 2023 · Assembly Jun 1, 2023
How they voted
29–9
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 40
Sep 11, 2023
D
Democratic31
93% Yea
R
Republican9
100% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
31
Key actions
11
Committee
10
Amendments
9
Feb 1, 2024
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
lower
Jan 3, 2024
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto pending.
lower
Oct 8, 2023
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
lower
Sep 12, 2023
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 62. Noes 15. Page 3310.).
lower
Sep 11, 2023
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 13 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Sep 11, 2023
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 9. Page 2561.).
upper
Sep 1, 2023
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
upper
Sep 1, 2023
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (September 1).
upper
Aug 14, 2023
Committee
In committee: Referred to APPR suspense file.
upper
Jul 13, 2023
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jul 13, 2023
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 1.) (July 11).
upper
Jun 22, 2023
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 4. Noes 0.) (June 22). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Jun 14, 2023
Committee
Referred to Coms. on L., P.E. & R. and JUD.
upper
Jun 1, 2023
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (60-14-6)
assembly
May 31, 2023
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 60. Noes 14. Page 2080.)
lower
May 18, 2023
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (May 18).
lower
May 10, 2023
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 27, 2023
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 26, 2023
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 25, 2023
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (April 25).
lower
Apr 13, 2023
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (April 12). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Apr 3, 2023
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on L. & E.
lower
Mar 30, 2023
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. & E. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 2, 2023
Committee
Referred to Coms. on L. & E. and JUD.
lower
Feb 18, 2023
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 20.
lower
1 primary · 8 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1356
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1356. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline