California Employment Law Glossary: Key Terms Explained
- Last Updated:
What California Employment Law Terms Actually Mean for You
California has its own employment law framework, separate from and often stronger than federal law. Key terms like “at-will employment,” “FEHA,” “PAGA,” and “constructive discharge” carry specific California definitions that affect your rights and the deadlines attached to them. For example, California’s main anti-discrimination law, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code § 12940), covers employers with as few as five employees, compared to fifteen under federal Title VII, and its harassment protections apply to workplaces of any size. This glossary defines the terms California workers most commonly encounter, each anchored to the specific statute or agency that governs it.
How to Use This California Employment Law Glossary
Every definition below is specific to California law. Federal definitions may differ, and where California law is more protective, this glossary says so plainly. Some terms carry filing deadlines: missing them can bar an otherwise valid claim. Nothing in this glossary is legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. If a term you encounter here describes something that has happened to you, the next step is a conversation with a California employment attorney, not further research.
California Anti-Discrimination Law: Core Terms
FEHA (Fair Employment and Housing Act)
FEHA is California’s primary civil rights statute prohibiting employment discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. It applies to any employer with five or more employees. Federal law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act) does not apply until an employer reaches fifteen employees, so a worker at a small business may have FEHA rights even though federal law would offer none. FEHA protections extend beyond traditional employees to job applicants, unpaid interns, apprentices, and volunteers.
When a worker prevails on a FEHA claim, available remedies include back pay, future lost wages, emotional distress damages, punitive damages (where the employer’s conduct was malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent), attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief. There is no statutory cap on damages for private-sector employees under FEHA.
Protected Characteristic
A protected characteristic is a personal attribute that California law prohibits employers from using as the basis for adverse employment decisions. Under FEHA, protected characteristics include:
- Race, color, national origin, and ancestry
- Religious creed
- Sex, gender, gender identity, and gender expression
- Sexual orientation
- Marital status
- Pregnancy and related conditions
- Physical disability and mental disability
- Medical condition
- Genetic information
- Age (40 and older)
- Military or veteran status
California’s list is longer than the list under federal Title VII, which does not explicitly cover genetic information in the same integrated framework or include military status as a separately enumerated category at the same statutory level.
CRD (California Civil Rights Department)
The California Civil Rights Department (formerly the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, or DFEH) is the state agency that receives and investigates FEHA complaints. Before a worker may file a civil lawsuit under FEHA, they must first file a verified complaint with the CRD within three years of the last discriminatory act. The CRD will then issue a Right-to-Sue letter, which opens the door to civil court.
Right-to-Sue Letter
A Right-to-Sue letter is a document issued by the CRD that authorizes a worker to file a FEHA civil lawsuit. Two deadlines attach to it: the worker has three years from the last discriminatory act to file the complaint with the CRD, and then one year from the date the Right-to-Sue letter is issued to file the lawsuit in court. Missing either deadline generally forfeits the claim.
Harassment and Discrimination Terms Every California Worker Should Know
Discrimination vs. Harassment: What Is the Difference?
These terms are often used interchangeably, but they describe distinct legal wrongs under FEHA. Discrimination refers to an adverse employment action (termination, demotion, pay cut, denial of promotion) taken because of a protected characteristic. Harassment refers to conduct, whether verbal, physical, or visual, that is severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment. An employer who passes over a qualified woman for promotion because of her sex has discriminated. A supervisor who repeatedly makes demeaning comments about a worker’s religion has harassed. Both are prohibited under Gov. Code § 12940.
Hostile Work Environment
A hostile work environment exists when harassment based on a protected characteristic is so severe or pervasive that it alters the conditions of employment for a reasonable person in the same situation. One critical California-specific detail: FEHA’s harassment provisions apply to all employers, regardless of size. Even a company with a single employee must provide a workplace free from harassment under Gov. Code § 12940(j)(4)(A). This is unlike discrimination protections, which require at least five employees.
Disability Accommodation Terms: What California Law Requires
Disability (California Definition vs. Federal ADA)
Standard | California (FEHA) | Federal (ADA)
|
|---|---|---|
Threshold for coverage | A physical or mental impairment that limits a major life activity; California courts interpret “limits” broadly | Must “substantially limit” a major life activity |
Employer size required | 5 or more employees | 15 or more employees |
Practical effect | More workers qualify for accommodation rights in California | Narrower pool of qualifying conditions and covered employers |
Reasonable Accommodation
A reasonable accommodation is a modification to a job, work environment, or the way work is performed that enables a qualified employee with a disability to carry out the essential functions of the role. Examples include modified schedules, remote work, reassignment to a vacant position, and provision of assistive equipment. The obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation arises under Gov. Code § 12940 once an employer knows or should know of a disability.
Interactive Process
The interactive process is the mandatory, good-faith, timely dialogue between employer and employee to identify and explore reasonable accommodation options. Gov. Code § 12940(n) requires employers to engage in this process. A critical California-specific point: an employer’s failure to engage in the interactive process is itself a separate FEHA violation, even if no accommodation was ultimately possible. The employer cannot simply declare accommodation impossible and move on. To illustrate: a warehouse worker requests a lifting restriction accommodation after a back injury. Her employer never responds to her HR request and later terminates her. Even if no accommodation existed that would have worked for the business, the employer has violated § 12940(n) by never engaging in the dialogue.
Wage and Hour Terms: The Entries Workers Most Often Get Wrong
At-Will Employment
California follows the at-will employment doctrine, codified at Labor Code § 2922: either an employer or an employee may end the employment relationship at any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all. However, at-will does not mean unlimited. Statutory exceptions mean an employer cannot terminate a worker for a discriminatory reason, in retaliation for protected activity, or in violation of a contract. Many workers mistakenly believe “at-will” forecloses any legal claim after a termination. It does not.
Exempt vs. Non-Exempt Employee
Whether a worker is exempt or non-exempt determines whether they are entitled to overtime pay and meal and rest breaks. Employers frequently misclassify workers as exempt to avoid these obligations. To lawfully classify a worker as exempt under the executive, administrative, or professional exemptions, the employer must satisfy both a salary test and a duties test:
- Salary test (2025): The employee must earn at least $68,640 per year ($5,720 per month), which equals twice the California statewide minimum wage of $16.50 per hour for full-time work.
- Duties test: The employee’s primary duties must consist of the exempt work described under the applicable exemption. Salary alone is not enough.
Overtime
California overtime rules are more protective than federal law. Non-exempt employees are entitled to:
- 1.5 times their regular rate of pay for hours worked over 8 in a single workday
- 1.5 times their regular rate for hours over 40 in a workweek
- 2 times their regular rate for hours worked over 12 in a single workday
- 2 times their regular rate for the first 8 hours worked on the seventh consecutive workday of a workweek
Wage Theft
Wage theft is not a single act. Under Labor Code §§ 200, 201, 203, 226, and 558, wage theft includes nonpayment or underpayment of minimum wage, failure to pay overtime, delayed or missing final paychecks, inaccurate wage statements, unlawful payroll deductions, failure to reimburse business expenses, and paying flat daily rates that do not account for all hours worked.
PAGA (Private Attorneys General Act)
PAGA, codified at Labor Code §§ 2698-2699, allows an “aggrieved employee” to file a lawsuit on behalf of the State of California to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations committed against themselves and similarly situated coworkers. Before filing, the employee must submit written notice to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) through its online portal and wait 65 days. The employer has 33 days within that window to attempt to cure certain violations.
The 2024 PAGA reform (AB 2288 and SB 92, effective June 19, 2024) made several significant changes. Penalty recoveries are now split 65% to the LWDA and 35% to aggrieved employees under Lab. Code § 2699(m). A PAGA plaintiff must have personally experienced a Labor Code violation within the one year before filing the LWDA notice (§ 2699(c)(1)), and may only seek penalties for coworkers who experienced violations of the same Labor Code sections as the plaintiff (§ 2699(a)). If your employer has violated wage and hour laws affecting multiple workers, a California employment class action may offer an alternative or parallel path alongside a PAGA claim.
Termination and Retaliation Terms
Wrongful Termination
Wrongful termination is a termination that violates a statute, public policy, or an express or implied employment contract. California’s at-will rule does not protect terminations that are discriminatory, retaliatory, or otherwise unlawful. Common bases for wrongful termination claims include termination because of a protected characteristic under FEHA, termination in retaliation for filing a wage claim, or termination for reporting safety violations.
Constructive Discharge
Constructive discharge occurs when an employer deliberately creates working conditions so intolerable that a reasonable person in the employee’s position would feel compelled to resign. California law treats this resignation as an involuntary termination. The key word is “deliberately”: courts look at whether the employer intentionally made the workplace unbearable, not just whether the employee was unhappy. A worker who resigns under constructive discharge may bring the same claims as a worker who was formally fired. If you are considering your options after a resignation, reviewing how to negotiate a severance agreement in California may be a relevant next step.
Retaliation
Retaliation is an adverse employment action taken against an employee because the employee engaged in a protected activity. Protected activities include reporting discrimination or harassment, filing a wage claim with the Labor Commissioner, participating in a workplace investigation, or requesting a reasonable accommodation. Labor Code § 98.6 specifically prohibits retaliation against workers who file wage claims or assist others in doing so. Retaliation does not have to take the form of termination; demotion, schedule reduction, and hostile reassignment can all qualify as adverse actions.
Key Deadlines and Thresholds at a Glance
Legal Term or Trigger | Deadline or Threshold | Governing Authority
|
|---|---|---|
File FEHA complaint with CRD | 3 years from last discriminatory act | Gov. Code § 12940 / CRD |
File civil lawsuit after Right-to-Sue letter | 1 year from date of letter | Gov. Code § 12940 / CRD |
File PAGA notice with LWDA | Within 1 year of personally experienced violation | |
PAGA pre-filing waiting period | 65 days after LWDA notice | |
FEHA employer coverage (discrimination) | 5 or more employees | Gov. Code § 12940 |
FEHA employer coverage (harassment) | Any size, including one employee | Gov. Code § 12940(j)(4)(A) |
Exempt salary threshold (2025) | $68,640/year ($5,720/month) | DIR / Lab. Code § 515 |
Warning Signs: When a Term You Just Encountered May Signal a Legal Claim
- Your termination letter cites “performance” but the discipline began shortly after you filed an HR complaint or requested medical leave
- You were told your position was “eliminated” within weeks of returning from a protected leave
- Your employer labeled you “exempt” but your primary duties are routine or non-managerial
- You were paid a flat daily rate and never received separate overtime pay for long shifts
- Your employer never responded to your accommodation request, even informally
- You resigned after repeated misconduct by a supervisor that HR did not address
- You received a final paycheck late or with deductions you did not authorize
What This Means When You Are Trying to Understand What Happened to You
Legal terms are not just vocabulary. Each one you encounter in a termination letter, an HR response, or a court document corresponds to a specific right, a specific deadline, or a specific employer obligation. If you recognize any of the terms above in your own situation, the most important practical step is to document what happened and when: dates, names, communications, and any HR responses.
Deadlines under California law (three years to the CRD, one year after a Right-to-Sue letter, one year for a PAGA notice) run from specific events, and they do not pause while you decide what to do. The strength of California’s framework, from FEHA’s no-cap damages to PAGA’s enforcement mechanism, only benefits workers who act within those windows. Understanding whether the benefits of hiring an employment lawyer apply to your situation is a reasonable next step before any deadline approaches.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does “at-will employment” mean my employer can fire me for any reason?
Not quite. Labor Code § 2922 permits termination for any reason or no reason, but it does not permit termination for an unlawful reason, such as discrimination based on a protected characteristic, retaliation for filing a wage complaint, or violation of public policy. At-will sets the default rule; statutes create the exceptions.
My employer has fewer than fifteen employees. Do I still have discrimination protections?
Yes, if your employer has five or more employees. FEHA applies at five employees, not fifteen. And if your claim involves harassment, FEHA protections apply regardless of how many employees your employer has.
I resigned. Can I still bring a legal claim?
Possibly. If your resignation was the result of intolerable working conditions that your employer deliberately created, California law may treat your departure as a constructive discharge, which carries the same legal consequences as a termination. The facts of how the conditions arose and what the employer knew will matter significantly.
What is the difference between a PAGA claim and a class action?
A PAGA claim is brought on behalf of the State of California to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations, with the worker acting as a private attorney general. A class action is a civil lawsuit brought on behalf of a defined group of similarly situated workers to recover actual damages and other relief. Both can address widespread employer violations, and they can sometimes be pursued together.
What happens if my employer never responded to my accommodation request?
Failure to engage in the interactive process is itself a separate FEHA violation under Gov. Code § 12940(n), even if a workable accommodation would not have existed. Non-response is not a defense. You may have a claim based on the failure to engage, independent of whether accommodation was ultimately feasible.
Contact Setareh Law Group: If a term in this glossary describes something that may have happened to you, the attorneys at Setareh Law Group are ready to help you understand your options under California law. Contact the firm for a consultation. No outcomes are guaranteed, and case results depend on the specific facts and circumstances of each matter.
Contact us today:
📞 Phone: 310-888-7771
✉️ Email: help@setarehlaw.com
🌐 Address: 420 N Camden Dr, Beverly Hills CA, 90210
General Information Disclaimer: This glossary is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Setareh Law Group or any of its attorneys. California employment law is complex and fact-specific; the information above may not apply to your individual circumstances. Do not rely on this glossary as a substitute for advice from a licensed California employment attorney.
Sources and Additional Resources
Authoritative sources cited
- Gov. Code § 12940
- CRD
- Labor Code § 2922
- $16.50 per hour
- Labor Code §§ 200
- 558
- Labor Code §§ 2698-2699
- Labor Code § 98.6
- Lab. Code § 515
Related Setareh Law Group resources
Practice Areas:
Table of Contents
- verified by Trustindex
