AB 1803: Proposed Anti-Hate Speech Workplace Training Requirements in California

AB 1803 represents California’s latest effort to expand mandatory workplace training requirements—this time, to address what its sponsors describe as a gap in existing law with respect to hate-motivated conduct in the workplace.

Quick Hits

• California is poised to expand mandatory workplace training requirements. AB 1803, introduced in February 2026, would require employers with five or more employees to incorporate anti-hate speech training into their existing workplace harassment prevention programs—a response to a reported increase in hate crimes across the state over the past decade.
• The bill builds on existing law. Rather than mandating a separate training program, the legislation adds anti-hate speech content to the training California employers already provide on sexual harassment, abusive conduct, and gender-related harassment. Notably, the bill does not define “hate speech,” a gap lawmakers have flagged for potential revision.
• Employers may want to begin evaluating their compliance readiness. If enacted, AB 1803 would require companies to assess whether their current training curricula, recordkeeping systems, and trainer qualifications adequately address the new anti-hate speech component—though no formal opposition to the bill has emerged as it advances through the legislature.

The Problem AB 1803 Is Trying to Solve

The bill’s authors, Assembly Members Josh Lowenthal (D-69) and Corey Jackson (D-60), cite a number of statistics in support of the legislation, including that reported hate crimes in California increased by 159.9 percent over the last decade. From 2019 to 2022 alone, the number of hate crimes against Black Californians nearly tripled, hate crimes against Latinos almost doubled, and hate crimes against Asians more than tripled. California’s Civil Rights Department estimated that 2.6 million Californians experienced at least one act of hate between 2022 and 2023. The bill’s legislative analysis also states that the 2023 California Health Interview Survey found that more than one in three Californians had experienced hate at a business in the previous year.

And here is the gap that AB 1803 is specifically designed to close. While California already requires employers to train employees on sexual harassment, abusive conduct, and harassment based on gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation, there is currently no requirement that workers receive training specifically on anti-hate speech. As Equality California put it in its letter of support, “This gap leaves employees vulnerable to hostile work environments, while also leaving employers without clear guidance on how to prevent and address these behaviors.”

What AB 1803 Would Require

AB 1803 would amend Government Code Section 12950.1 to add anti-hate speech training as a required component of the existing workplace training program that California employers with five or more employees are already obligated to provide.

Under existing law, employers with five or more employees must provide at least two hours of training to supervisory employees and at least one hour to non-supervisory employees, once every two years. AB 1803 would not create a standalone, separate anti-hate speech training obligation; it would add anti-hate speech as another component woven into that existing training framework, alongside the current requirements covering abusive conduct, gender identity, and sexual orientation.

An important point: AB 1803 does not define “hate speech.” The bill’s legislative analysis notes that hate speech itself is not illegal, but it can violate employment law when it rises to an actionable level of workplace harassment or discrimination. The Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment has flagged this definitional gap and noted that the authors may wish to address it before the bill advances further.

The committee has also noted that various organizations have proposed definitions for hate speech. For example, the American Library Association defines hate speech to mean “any form of expression through which speakers intend to vilify, humiliate, or incite hatred against a group or class of persons on the basis of race, religion, skin color, sexual identity, gender identity, ethnicity, disability or national origin.” Similarly, the United Nations defines hate speech as referring to “offensive discourse targeting a group or an individual based on inherent characteristics (such as race, religion or gender) and that may threaten social peace. Hate speech can be conveyed through any form of expression, including images, cartoons, memes, objects, gestures, and symbols, and it can be disseminated offline or online. Hate speech is “discriminatory” (biased, bigoted or intolerant) or “pejorative” (prejudiced, contemptuous or demeaning) of an “individual or group.”

Key Takeaways

For most employers, the practical impact of AB 1803 will be felt in the HR and compliance departments. Employers may wish to consider the following as the bill moves forward.

• Consider reviewing current training programs. Employers that already work with third-party training vendors or use the Civil Rights Department’s online training modules may want to consider whether their current curricula address hate speech in any meaningful way.
• Understand the flexibility built into the law. Employers are not required to build entirely new training programs from scratch. The law expressly permits training on this topic to be provided in conjunction with other training, completed individually or in group settings, and delivered in shorter segments as long as the total hourly requirement is met.
• Consider recordkeeping practices. California’s training law already requires employers to track and verify employee completion of required training. If AB 1803 passes, employers may wish to consider whether existing recordkeeping systems can document that the anti-hate speech component was included and completed, particularly for new hires, who must receive training within six months of hire.
• Consider trainer qualifications. Whether in-house HR professionals or outside counsel are used to deliver the training, employers may wish to consider whether the person leading the session has sufficient knowledge and expertise relevant to this new component. The bill’s broader training framework already requires that trainers have expertise in the areas they cover, and that same expectation will logically extend to anti-hate speech content.

Looking Ahead

AB 1803 is still moving through the legislative process. As of the bill’s most recent committee hearing, no opposition has been formally filed. On March 18, 2026, AB 1803 passed out of the Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment and was referred to the Assembly’s Committee on the Judiciary. Should AB 1803 be signed into law, employers will need to assess whether their existing training programs satisfy the new requirement. Consulting with employment counsel before any compliance deadline is established may be a useful step for employers seeking guidance on how the bill could affect their operations.

Ogletree Deakins’ California offices will continue to monitor developments and will provide updates on the California blog as additional information becomes available.

Follow and Subscribe
LinkedIn | Instagram | Webinars | Podcasts