California lawmakers have advanced a bill that would require employers to allow employees to schedule medical treatment during the workday, although there are still plenty of hurdles before the bill could be signed into law.
The California Assembly Committee approved Assembly Bill 2098 and sent it to the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee. The bill would amend Labor Code 132a, which is more commonly known as the workers’ compensation system’s version of an “anti-discrimination” statute.
Under the bill, an employee who made a “reasonable effort” to schedule medical treatment for a workers’ compensation claim outside of work hours would be entitled to treat during work hours.
The bill does contain an exception for employers to deny such a request, which is known as the “business necessity” exception. It defines “business necessity” as “an overriding legitimate business purpose such that denial of the request is necessary to the safe and efficient operation of the business, and for which there is no feasible alternative to denial of the request that would serve the business purpose.”
Employers who abuse the business necessity exception would be guilty of a misdemeanor. For example, an employer who knows that business necessity does not really require that the employee work their entire shift on the day they were hoping to get medical treatment would probably be liable for a misdemeanor under the statute.
Likewise, any employer who fires, threatens to fire, or discriminates against employees seeking to take medical leave would be guilty of a misdemeanor as well under the bill’s proposed language.
According to WorkCompCentral, lobbyists who testified against the bill argued that the “undue hardship” test under the Fair Employment and Housing Act would be more appropriate to use instead of the “business necessity” clause in AB 2098. They also argued that the bill is largely unnecessary, as LC 132a already bars discrimination against employees for exercising their workers’ compensation rights.
The bill is now headed to the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee. Assuming Appropriations passes the bill, it would then be subject to a vote by the General Assembly, and if approved by the General Assembly, it would then be sent to the state Senate for further consideration. If both the General Assembly and state Senate approve the bill, then they would send it to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who could either veto it or sign it into law.
Of course, it’s possible that lawmakers could still make significant changes to the bill’s language via the amendment process.
Stay tuned to Bradford and Barthel’s blog for more coverage of this and other bills throughout the 2026 legislative session!
Got a question about workers’ compensation defense issues or pending legislation? Feel free to contact John P. Kamin. Mr. Kamin is a workers’ compensation defense attorney and partner at Bradford & Barthel’s Woodland Hills location, where he monitors the recent legislative affairs as the firm’s Director of the Editorial Board. Mr. Kamin previously worked as a journalist for WorkCompCentral, where he reported on work-related injuries in all 50 states. Please feel free to contact John at jkamin@bradfordbarthel.com or at (818) 654-0411.
Viewing this website does not form an attorney/client relationship between you and Bradford & Barthel, LLP or any of its attorneys. This website is for informational purposes only and does not contain legal advice. Please do not act or refrain from acting based on anything you read on this site. This document is not a substitute for legal advice and may not address every factual scenario. If you have a legal question, we encourage you to contact your favorite Bradford & Barthel, LLP attorney to discuss the legal issues applicable to your unique case. No website is entirely secure, so please be cautious with information provided through the contact form or email. Do not assume confidentiality exists in anything you send through this website or email, until an attorney/client relationship is formed.