Labor Code section 132a is one of the most underused tools in California comp practice. It makes it a misdemeanor, and a basis for a workers' compensation remedy, for an employer to discharge or threaten to discharge, or otherwise discriminate against, an employee because the employee has suffered an industrial injury or filed a claim. Applicants' attorneys often learn about it only after a termination, when the client is already out of work and the comp case has stalled. The statute rewards early attention to the facts, because the elements are narrow and the proof is mostly circumstantial.
The Prima Facie Case
The framework traces to the California Supreme Court's decision in Judson Steel. The applicant must show three things: an industrial injury or claim, a detrimental employment action, and a causal connection between them. The key limit is that the action must single out the injured employee for disadvantageous treatment because of the injury. A neutral rule applied evenly to everyone is not enough on its own. The Supreme Court later confirmed in Lauher that a uniform policy, such as termination after a fixed period of absence, does not violate the statute unless the applicant shows it was applied to target the injury or that the employer has an independent duty to accommodate under other law.
That second point is where many 132a petitions fail. The statute is not a general disability-accommodation statute. Accommodation claims belong under FEHA and, in the right fact pattern, the interactive process. Section 132a remedies sit in the comp system and flow through the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. Practitioners should evaluate both tracks at intake, because the elements, remedies, and deadlines differ.
Typical Fact Patterns That Work
- Termination shortly after a claim form or a represented-party letter, with shifting explanations from management.
- Refusal to reinstate or return an employee to the same position after modified duty ends, where comparable positions were available to others.
- Reduced hours, loss of overtime, or reassignment after the employee obtains work restrictions.
- Discipline for absences that were medically excused under the claim, imposed when similar attendance issues were tolerated for uninjured workers.
- Threats related to filing a claim or retaining counsel.
Comparators carry the case. Obtain personnel files for employees with similar attendance, performance, or conduct histories and show how the employer treated them differently. In a small workplace, a single comparator can be decisive. In a large one, you may need a broader pattern from HR records.
Discovery and Evidence
Serve requests early for the termination decision file: emails among supervisors, human-resources notes, and the written policy cited as the reason. Timing evidence is persuasive but rarely enough alone. Pair it with deviations from the employer's own progressive-discipline policy, inconsistent explanations, and testimony about supervisors' comments regarding the claim or the cost of workers' compensation. If the employer terminated for a stated attendance violation, compare the dates against restriction periods and medical notes already in the claim file.
Be ready for the defense that the employer could not accommodate the restrictions and that no work was available. That is a legitimate defense in some circumstances, but it invites scrutiny of the search for alternatives. Request evidence of what positions existed, who filled them, and whether anyone asked the applicant. The absence of any documented search is itself meaningful.
Remedies and Procedure
The remedies are narrower than in a civil employment suit. The WCAB may order reinstatement and reimbursement of lost wages and benefits, and may award increased compensation of up to one-half of the compensation otherwise due, capped at a fixed dollar amount, plus costs and expenses up to a stated limit. The caps mean 132a petitions rarely drive case value on their own. They matter most as leverage in a global resolution and as a basis for reinstatement, which can be worth more to a client who wants the job back.
The petition must be filed within one year of the discriminatory act, and the clock can be unforgiving where an employee waits to see if the employer relents. Calendar it at the time of the adverse action. For an overview of parallel claims, our workers' compensation category collects coverage on penalty petitions and related remedies.
Coordinating With Civil Claims
A wrongful termination or FEHA action may run alongside the 132a petition. Be cautious about inconsistent positions. Testimony in the comp case about work capacity can be used in the civil case on damages, and vice versa. Also consider how a civil settlement may interact with credit and offset questions in the comp claim, and how a compromise and release can extinguish rights if drafted loosely. Where a client also has a third-party claim for the underlying injury, the employer's lien under the Labor Code can complicate overall recovery, and our liens and settlement coverage addresses that mechanic.
Practical Checklist
- Calendar the one-year deadline from the adverse action.
- Identify the singling-out evidence: comparators, timing, shifting reasons.
- Screen simultaneously for FEHA accommodation and interactive process claims.
- Subpoena the full decision file and the employer's written policies.
- Value the petition realistically given statutory caps, and use reinstatement as leverage.