Labor Relations
AB 187 (2026): Union Orientation Made Permanent; Goat Herder Protections Added
Updated
Assembly Bill 187, introduced by the Assembly Committee on Budget, is a budget-related measure that amends several sections of the Government Code and adds a new section to the Labor Code relating to employment. Among other changes, it makes permanent a public-sector union’s right to hold an in-person new-employee meeting and creates wage and working-condition protections for goat herders. Because it is a budget bill providing for appropriations, it took effect immediately upon filing.
Background
Existing law grants public employees the right to join and be represented by employee organizations, and it requires specified public employers to give exclusive representatives access to new-employee orientations. Government Code section 3556 entitled a representative to schedule an in-person worksite meeting when the employer had not held an in-person orientation within 30 days of a new hire’s start date. That in-person meeting requirement was set to be repealed as of June 30, 2027.
Separately, the Labor Code has long included wage and working-condition rules for sheepherders, including an alternative monthly minimum wage and civil penalties for underpayment. No parallel statute covered goat herders. AB 187 addresses both gaps and also makes benefit-fund and retirement-membership changes in the Government Code.
What the Law Changes
The bill amends Government Code section 3556 to confirm that the in-person worksite meeting satisfies the mandatory-access requirements for new-employee orientation and onboarding, and it removes the June 30, 2027 repeal, making the in-person meeting requirement operative indefinitely. Representatives may communicate directly with new hires for up to 30 minutes of paid time, and employers must provide on-site space within seven calendar days of a request.
The bill adds Labor Code section 2695.4, establishing labor protections for goat herders covering wages, meal and rest periods, tools, lodging, and communications. For a goat herder on a regularly scheduled 24-hour, seven-days-per-week on-call shift, an employer may pay the monthly minimum wage set in Wage Order No. 14-2001 as an alternative to paying the minimum wage for all hours worked, with that amount increasing whenever the state minimum wage rises. Violations carry a civil penalty of $100 per underpaid employee per pay period for an initial violation and $250 for a subsequent violation, plus unpaid wages.
AB 187 makes the public-sector union in-person new-employee meeting a permanent right under Government Code section 3556 and enacts wage, meal, rest, lodging, and posting protections for goat herders under Labor Code section 2695.4.
Phase-In, Sunset, and Other Provisions
The goat herder protections in Labor Code section 2695.4 are temporary: the section remains in effect only until January 1, 2029, and is repealed as of that date. Employers of goat herders must post a copy of these provisions, and the sheepherder provisions, in an area frequented by goat herders in a language they understand.
The bill also amends Government Code sections 19816.18 and 22953 to authorize claims-fund reserve accounts for state benefit programs, including accounts held outside the centralized State Treasury System under specified safeguards. It amends section 20305 and adds section 20899.7 to extend Public Employees’ Retirement System membership eligibility to members of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, addressing how service before January 1, 2027 is credited.
What This Means for You
The new law fixes in place a public-sector union’s right to hold a paid in-person meeting with newly hired employees and sets baseline wage, meal, rest, and lodging standards for goat herders through the end of 2028. It touches public employer–union relations and the agricultural workplaces where goat herders are employed.
I write these summaries as general information about developments in California employment law. They are not legal advice and don’t create a mediator–client relationship. For guidance on a specific matter, consult a qualified attorney.