THE SHORT ANSWER
The law gives you reinstatement, lost wages, and increased compensation capped at $10,000, with one year to file at the Appeals Board. But firing an injured worker very often violates FEHA, CFRA and public policy at the same time — and those claims have no cap. Both sets of deadlines run at once.
On this page
What follows is what § 132a actually prohibits and provides, the proof standard as the Supreme Court framed it, why the civil case is usually larger, what retaliation looks like in practice, and what to do this week.
Contents7 sections
What Section 132a prohibits, and what it gives you
Prohibited conduct by the employer: discharging, threatening to discharge, or in any manner discriminating against an employee because the employee filed or made known an intention to file a claim — or because the employee testified or made known an intention to testify in another employee’s case.
Prohibited conduct by the insurer: advising, directing, or threatening an employer with policy cancellation or a premium increase in order to get an employee discharged for filing a claim or testifying. That provision exists because it happened, and it still does.
| REMEDY | WHAT THE LAW PROVIDES |
|---|---|
| Increased compensation | Increased by one-half, capped at $10,000 |
| Costs and expenses | Up to $250 |
| Reinstatement | To the former position |
| Lost wages and work benefits | Reimbursed |
| Criminal exposure | Violation is a misdemeanor |
The Appeals Board — not the Superior Court — has full jurisdiction over a § 132a claim, subject only to judicial review. And the deadline is one year from the discriminatory act or the termination.
The proof standard, honestly
Here is the standard. In Department of Rehabilitation v. WCABWCAB Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. The court system that decides these cases. 23 district offices statewide. (Lauher) (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1281, the California Supreme Court held that § 132a is not a general guarantee of good treatment after an injury. Detrimental consequences flowing from an industrial injury are not automatically discrimination.
GELSON’S MARKETS, INC. v. WCAB (2009)
The Court of Appeal annulled a § 132a award applying Lauher, holding that the employee had to show the employer “single[d] him out for disadvantageous treatment because of the industrial nature of his injury” — and that he failed because there was no evidence the employer would have treated a non-injured employee presenting identical medical documentation any differently.
What this means practically: build the comparison. Who else took medical leave and was not fired? What does the handbook say about leave? Was the policy applied to anyone else this way? A § 132a case is won with comparators and documents, not with the unfairness of the outcome.
That comparison is the heart of the case. Not “was I treated badly.” “Was I treated differently than a comparable employee who was not industrially injured would have been.”
Later Board decisions have read Lauher somewhat more favorably to workers, framing the prima facie case as: the worker suffered adverse consequences from employer action or inaction triggered by the industrial injury, as to something the worker had a legal right to. Once that is shown, the employer may defeat the claim by proving it acted out of business necessity.
Section 132a is usually the smaller claim
This is the most important thing on this page. The § 132a cap is $10,000 plus reinstatement and lost wages. A civil wrongful termination or disability discrimination action has no such cap — and firing an injured worker very often violates several other statutes at the same time.
FEHA DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION
California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act requires reasonable accommodation and a good faith interactive process for an employee with a disability — including a temporary one from a work injury. Terminating instead of accommodating is a FEHA violation, and FEHA provides emotional distress damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees.
FAILURE TO ENGAGE IN THE INTERACTIVE PROCESS
A separate FEHA violation from failure to accommodate. Employers lose on it constantly.
CFRA AND FMLA
Where the employer and the employee qualify.
WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY
A common law tort with tort damages.
And § 132a does not displace those claims. They proceed in Superior Court while the § 132a petition proceeds at the Appeals Board. If you were fired after a work injury, the workers’ compensation retaliation claim is worth filing and it is frequently not the main event. Both deadlines run at once, and the civil deadlines are their own.
What retaliation actually looks like
Outright firing is the obvious case and not the common one. The recurring patterns:
- Termination shortly after the claim — Proximity in time is evidence.
- “Restructuring” that eliminates only the injured worker’s position — A reorganization of one.
- Hours cut to near-nothing after the claim — Constructive removal without a termination letter.
- Reassignment to a harder, worse, or more remote job — Or refusal to accommodate restrictions the employer accommodates for others.
- Sudden discipline in a previously clean file — The paper trail that starts the week the claim does.
- Pressure not to file at all — Being told it will be handled off the books, or that the company will pay cash instead.
- Immigration threats — This is unlawful, it is retaliation, and it is common. A worker’s immigration status does not affect the right to workers’ compensation benefits.
And “he quit” is a defense you should expect where the conditions were made intolerable.
What to do now
- Write down the timeline today — Dates of injury, report, claim form, every conversation, every change in schedule or duty, and every name.
- Preserve everything — Texts, emails, schedules, pay stubs, the handbook, discipline records. Forward work emails to a personal account before you lose access, if you still have it.
- Request your personnel file in writing — California employees have a right to inspect and receive a copy, and the request itself creates a dated record.
- Identify the comparators — Who else was out on leave? What happened to them?
- File the DWC-1DWC-1 The claim form. Filing it starts the 90-day presumption and the $10,000 treatment obligation. anyway — Retaliation for filing is unlawful, and not filing does not protect you.
- Get both claims evaluated at once — The civil case has its own deadlines and they are not the same as the one-year § 132a deadline.
Frequently asked questions
Can I be fired for filing a workers’ comp claim?
Not because of the claim. The law prohibits discharge or discrimination because an employee filed, intended to file, or testified in a claim.
How long do I have?
One year from the discriminatory act or the termination.
What is it worth?
Increased compensation by one-half, capped at $10,000, plus up to $250 in costs, reinstatement, and lost wages and benefits. The cap is why the civil case usually matters more.
They say I was laid off for business reasons.
Business necessity is the defense. The answer is comparators and documents — who else was affected, and how were similarly situated non-injured employees treated.
Can they refuse to take me back with restrictions?
An employer is not required to create a job or retain an employee who cannot do the work. But FEHA separately requires reasonable accommodation and an interactive process, and that obligation is broader than anything in § 132a.
My employer threatened to report me to immigration.
That is unlawful retaliation, and your immigration status does not affect your right to workers’ compensation benefits.
Should I file both a comp claim and a lawsuit?
Frequently yes. They are separate proceedings in separate forums with separate deadlines, and the civil claim is usually the larger one.
Sources
Labor Code § 132aGovernment Code §§ 12900 et seq. (FEHA)Department of Rehabilitation v. WCAB (Lauher) (2003) 30 Cal.4th 1281Gelson’s Markets, Inc. v. WCAB (2009).
General information about California law, not legal advice about your case.
Reviewed by Jamey Teitell, Partner & Trial Attorney · Last reviewed
Law Offices of Solov & Teitell, APC · (213) 380-9310
Printed from https://www.solovteitell.com/workers-compensation/retaliation/ · Last reviewed