Under Government Code §12940(h), it is unlawful for an employer “to discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against any person because the person has opposed any practices forbidden under this part” or has filed a complaint, testified, or assisted in a proceeding under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (§12940(h)). Labor Code §1102.5(b) separately bars retaliation against an employee who discloses information, including to a supervisor, that the employee has reasonable cause to believe shows a violation of law (§1102.5(b)). Labor Code §98.6(a) bars retaliation against an employee who has “made a written or oral complaint that they are owed unpaid wages” (§98.6(a)).
Key deadlines
- Complaint to the Civil Rights Department (retaliation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act): three years from the date the unlawful practice occurred (Gov. Code §12960(e)(5)).
- Civil action after a right-to-sue notice: one year from the date of the notice (Gov. Code §12965(c)(1)(D)).
- Retaliation complaint to the Labor Commissioner: one year after the occurrence of the violation (Labor Code §98.7(a)(1)).
These are general periods; exceptions and tolling rules exist, so seek advice early.
Can I be fired for reporting harassment in California?
Firing an employee because the employee reported or opposed harassment is retaliation under Government Code §12940(h). The protection covers opposing a practice the Act forbids, and filing a complaint, testifying, or assisting in a proceeding. It is a separate violation from the harassment itself.
The same facts can also fall under Labor Code §1102.5(b) when the report went to a person with authority to investigate, discover, or correct the violation. The firm’s retaliation and whistleblower page explains how these claims are evaluated for employees across Orange County, Los Angeles County, and the Inland Empire.
What is whistleblower retaliation under Labor Code §1102.5?
California Labor Code §1102.5 is California’s core whistleblower protection statute. It prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee who discloses information to a government or law enforcement agency, to a person with authority over the employee, or to another employee who has authority to investigate or correct the issue, when the employee has reasonable cause to believe the information shows a violation of a state or federal statute, or of a local, state, or federal rule or regulation. It also protects employees who refuse to participate in an activity that would result in a violation of a state or federal statute, or of a local, state, or federal rule or regulation, and it covers internal complaints (to a supervisor or HR), not just reports to outside agencies.
The protection applies “regardless of whether disclosing the information is part of the employee’s job duties” (§1102.5(b)). And the standard is reasonable cause to believe the information reported shows a violation; the statute does not require you to prove the violation occurred.
Who has the burden of proof in a whistleblower retaliation case?
Labor Code §1102.6 sets the framework. Once the employee shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the protected activity “was a contributing factor in the alleged prohibited action against the employee, the employer shall have the burden of proof to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alleged action would have occurred for legitimate, independent reasons even if the employee had not engaged in activities protected by Section 1102.5.”
What is the 90-day presumption of retaliation in California?
Senate Bill 497 (Stats. 2023, ch. 612), effective January 1, 2024, amended Labor Code §§98.6, 1102.5, and 1197.5. It wrote a presumption into two of them. Section 98.6(b)(1) and section 1197.5(k)(1), the equal pay statute, each provide: “If an employer engages in any action prohibited by this section within 90 days of the protected activity specified in this section, there shall be a rebuttable presumption in favor of the employee’s claim.”
Section 1102.5 does not contain that sentence. SB 497 instead rewrote the civil penalty in §1102.5(f)(1), which now provides that an employer “is liable for a civil penalty not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per employee for each violation of this section to be awarded to the employee who was retaliated against” (§1102.5(f)(1)). Section 98.6(b)(3) carries a penalty in the same amount, also awarded to the employee. The presumption is rebuttable, which means the employer may still offer evidence to overcome it.
What counts as retaliation besides being fired?
The statutes reach more than a termination. Section 98.6(a) provides that a person shall not “discharge an employee or in any manner discriminate, retaliate, or take any adverse action against any employee or applicant for employment” for protected conduct. Section 12940(h) covers anyone who would “discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against” a person for opposing a forbidden practice. Whether a particular change at work, such as a demotion, a cut in hours, a transfer, or discipline, is an adverse action depends on the facts.
What if I was fired for complaining about unpaid wages?
Labor Code §98.6(a) protects an employee who has “made a written or oral complaint that they are owed unpaid wages,” and an employee who has filed a bona fide complaint or claim about rights under the jurisdiction of the Labor Commissioner. If the employer acted within 90 days of that complaint, the presumption in §98.6(b)(1) applies.
If the complaint was about overtime, see how California overtime pay works. If your last paycheck was late or short, see when your final paycheck is due and how waiting-time penalties work. The wage and hour page covers those claims.
How do I bring a retaliation claim?
- Labor Commissioner. A person who believes they were discharged or otherwise discriminated against in violation of a law under the Labor Commissioner’s jurisdiction may file a complaint within one year after the violation (Labor Code §98.7(a)(1)).
- Civil action through an attorney. The California Labor Code allows employees to bring a private action through an attorney. This route allows for a broader range of claims, formal discovery, and potential remedies not available administratively, including penalties under statutes like PAGA or class-wide relief. Under Labor Code §244(a), an individual is not required to exhaust administrative remedies before bringing a civil action under the Labor Code unless the section sued on expressly requires it (that subdivision does not affect the notice requirements of Labor Code §2699.3 for claims under the Private Attorneys General Act), and under §1102.5(j), “[t]he court is authorized to award reasonable attorney’s fees to a plaintiff who brings a successful action for a violation of these provisions.”
A retaliation claim under the Fair Employment and Housing Act is different: it begins with a complaint to the California Civil Rights Department, and CRD states that in employment cases you must obtain a right-to-sue notice before filing your own lawsuit (CRD).
What should I document if I think I am facing retaliation at work?
Keep a dated record of what you reported, to whom, how, and what happened afterward. You may request your personnel file in writing under Labor Code §1198.5 and your payroll records under Labor Code §226. Keep copies of documents you already lawfully have, such as pay stubs, your offer letter, and your own emails, and do not take confidential company property.
Do not record conversations at work without advice first. Penal Code §632(a) prohibits intentionally recording a confidential communication without the consent of all parties to it.
Frequently asked questions
Can my employer fire me for reporting harassment in California?
Government Code §12940(h) makes it unlawful to discharge or otherwise discriminate against a person for opposing practices forbidden by the Fair Employment and Housing Act, or for filing a complaint, testifying, or assisting in a proceeding under it. The same facts may also support a claim under Labor Code §1102.5 when the report went to a person with authority to investigate or correct the problem.
What is the 90-day presumption of retaliation in California?
Labor Code §98.6(b)(1) and §1197.5(k)(1), as amended by SB 497 effective January 1, 2024, provide that if an employer takes a prohibited action within 90 days of the protected activity, there is a rebuttable presumption in favor of the employee’s claim. Section 1102.5 does not contain that presumption.
Do I have to be right that my employer broke the law?
No. Labor Code §1102.5(b) protects a disclosure made with reasonable cause to believe the information shows a violation of law. It also applies regardless of whether disclosing the information is part of your job duties.
How long do I have to file a retaliation complaint in California?
A complaint to the Labor Commissioner must be filed within one year after the violation under Labor Code §98.7(a)(1). For retaliation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code §12960(e)(5) allows three years to file with the Civil Rights Department, and §12965(c)(1)(D) allows one year from the right-to-sue notice to sue. A civil action can carry a different period, so seek advice early.
Can I go straight to court on a Labor Code retaliation claim?
Labor Code §244(a) provides that an individual is not required to exhaust administrative remedies before bringing a civil action under the Labor Code, unless the section under which the action is brought expressly requires it, and it does not affect the requirements of Labor Code §2699.3. Claims under the Fair Employment and Housing Act are different: the Civil Rights Department states that employment cases require a right-to-sue notice first.
This is general advice and specific legal questions should always be discussed with and reviewed by your attorney.
Interested in having your potential claim evaluated?
Do not delay. If you want an attorney to look at your situation, Taylor E. DeRosa of DeRosa Law Firm handles employment cases for employees across Orange County, Los Angeles County, and the Inland Empire. Reach out today for a free consultation.
About the author
Taylor Edward DeRosa is a California employment lawyer who represents employees. He was admitted to the State Bar of California in 2018 and practices from Orange County, California, representing employees across Orange County, Los Angeles County, and the Inland Empire, and throughout California. In 2025, the Employment Rights Section of the American Association for Justice presented its Employment Excellence Award to Taylor DeRosa for the verdict in Carmell v. Janet’s Enterprises, Inc.
Legal disclaimer
This article is general information about California law. It is not legal advice, it is not a substitute for legal advice and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and DeRosa Law Firm or Taylor DeRosa. Do not act or decline to act based on this article alone.
Employment cases turn on their specific facts, and the law changes. Deadlines in California employment cases are strict, they differ by claim type and missing one can end a claim permanently. If you think you may have a claim, speak with a lawyer about your own situation well before any deadline.
The statutes, deadlines and figures in this article were verified against California statutory and agency sources on October 17, 2026.
Attorney advertising. This communication may be considered attorney advertising under the California Rules of Professional Conduct. Taylor Edward DeRosa, DeRosa Law Firm, is responsible for the content of this page. No outcome is guaranteed. Nothing in this article is a prediction, promise, or guarantee about the result of any legal matter.
