Cal. Codes » Labor Code / DIVISION 2. EMPLOYMENT REGULATION AND SUPERVISION / PART 1. COMPENSATION / CHAPTER 1. Payment of Wages / ARTICLE 1. General Occupations
California Codes

Cal. Labor Code § 234 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

An employer absence control policy that counts sick leave taken pursuant to Section 233 as an absence that may lead to or result in discipline, discharge, demotion, or suspension is a per se violation of Section 233. An employee working under this policy is entitled to appropriate legal and equitable relief pursuant to Section 233.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2019–2022 · leading case: Labor & EmploymentSick & Safe Leave – Whether Employers May Apply Absence Control Policies to Prevent Abuse of Sick & Safe Leave (Md. Att'y Gen. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Labor & EmploymentSick & Safe Leave – Whether Employers May Apply Absence Control Policies to Prevent Abuse of Sick & Safe Leave (Md. Att'y Gen. 2019). “§ 23-374 ; Cal. Lab. Code § 234 ; D.C. Code Ann. § 32-531.”
Wilkin v. Cmty. Hosp. of the Monterey Peninsula CA4/3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021). “” Labor Code section 234 provides in relevant part: “An employer absence control policy that counts sick leave taken pursuant to Section 233 as an absence that may lead to or result in discipline, discharge, demotion, or suspension is a per se violation of Section 233.”
Wilkin v. Cmty. Hosp. of the Monterey Peninsula (Cal. Ct. App. 2021). “” Labor Code section 234 provides in relevant part: “An employer absence control policy that counts sick leave taken pursuant to Section 233 as an absence that may lead to or result in discipline, discharge, demotion, or suspension is a per se violation of Section 233.”
Thomasson v. Sentinel Transp., LLC (E.D. Cal. 2022). “Cal. Labor Code § 234 . 8 As discussed above in relation to Plaintiff’s first cause of action, viewing the evidence in the 9 light most favorable to Plaintiff, the Court finds that there is a fact issue as to whether the ability to 10 “barely walk” while driving is misleading.”
Cotterman v. Jan X-Ray Servs., Inc. (E.D. Cal. 2022). “8 Lab. Code § 234 (“An employer absence control policy that counts sick leave taken 9 pursuant to Section 233 as an absence that may lead to or result in discipline, discharge, 10 demotion, or suspension is a per se violation of Section 233.”
Maryland Attorney Gen. Opinion 104OAG062 (Md. Att'y Gen. 2019). “§ 23-374 ; Cal. Lab. Code § 234 ; D.C. Code Ann. § 32-531.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.