California Proposed Legislation – “Silenced No More Act” (SB-331)
Time 2 Minute Read
California Proposed Legislation – “Silenced No More Act” (SB-331)

California already has prohibitions on including non-disclosure provisions in certain settlement agreements related to sexual harassment.  Now California seeks to expand these prohibitions by enacting the Proposed California SB-331 (“Silenced No More Act”).  The new Act aims to prohibit provisions within any agreement that prevent or restrict the disclosure of factual information of claims related to harassment, discrimination, and retaliation.  The proposed bill recently passed senate and assembly, and if approved by governor, will become effective January 1, 2022.

Existing law, California Code of Civil Procedure section 1001, prohibits a settlement agreement from preventing the disclosure of factual information regarding specified acts related to a claim filed in a civil action or a complaint filed in an administrative action.  These acts include

  • sexual assault;
  • sexual harassment;
  • workplace harassment or discrimination based on sex, failure to prevent such an act, or retaliation against a person for reporting such act; and
  • harassment or discrimination based on sex by the owner of a housing accommodation, or retaliation against a person for reporting such an act.

Cal. Civ. Pro. § 1001 was enacted as part of SB-820, known as the STAND (Stand Together Against Non-Disclosures) Act, which was a response to the #MeToo movement which argued that secret settlements played in shielding perpetrators of sexually inappropriate behavior.

California now seeks to expand the coverage of Cal. Civ. Pro. § 1001.  SB-331 seeks to prohibit provisions in settlement agreements that restrict or prevent the disclosure of factual information of claims related to all forms of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation.  In other words, the bill expands the prohibition to include acts of workplace harassment or discrimination not based on sex.  For example, it includes discrimination or harassment based on race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, familial status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or veteran or military status.  (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 12940 and 12955.)

SB-331 also aims to prohibit an employer from requiring an employee to sign an agreement that denies an employee the right to disclose information about unlawful acts in the workplace, such as harassment or discrimination or any other conduct that an employee believes to be unlawful.  This section would apply not only to agreements made in exchange for a raise or bonus, or agreements made as a condition of employment or continued employment, but also to agreements related to an employee’s separation such as a severance agreement.

  • Partner

    Roland’s practice focuses on employment and labor law. Roland has exclusively handled employment cases since 1992. Roland’s experience includes handling cases of first impression in California involving class actions ...

  • Associate

    Alexis focuses on labor and employment law, advising and defending employers across a wide range of workplace matters. Alexis counsels clients on compliance, risk management, and day-to-day personnel issues, covering the full ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 3 Minute Read

The results are in: attorneys are filing more employment law cases in court.  Indeed, year-end reporting from legal databases like LexMachina confirm that the pace of filing new employment discrimination cases reached its highest level in 2025, surpassing 20,000 new filings nationwide.  Though overtime and minimum wage lawsuits under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) have continued to decline since 2015, discrimination cases under laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act are on the rise.

Time 3 Minute Read

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard based on their majority-group status.

Time 4 Minute Read

On February 19, 2025, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) Acting Chair Andrea Lucas vowed to prioritize anti-American national origin discrimination in compliance efforts, investigations, and litigation.

Time 5 Minute Read

On March 20, 2025, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued two key pieces of guidance: What To Do If You Experience Discrimination Related to DEI at Work and What You Should Know About DEI-Related Discrimination at Work.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page