Updated February 23, 2026
Disparate Treatment at Work: What California Caregivers Need to Know
Disparate treatment against caregivers remains one of the most overlooked forms of workplace discrimination in California. Parents and family caregivers often face unequal policies, denied promotions, or outright termination simply because of their caregiving responsibilities. California law, however, provides significantly stronger protections than federal standards. Understanding your rights under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), the California Family Rights Act (CFRA), and related statutes can help you identify discrimination and take appropriate action. This guide explains what constitutes disparate treatment, how California law protects caregivers, and when to seek legal counsel.
Understanding Disparate Treatment and Caregiver Discrimination
Employment discrimination takes many forms, but disparate treatment represents one of the most direct violations of workplace equality. This occurs when an employer intentionally treats employees or applicants differently based on their membership in a protected class. Unlike disparate impact, which involves neutral policies with discriminatory effects, disparate treatment is about deliberate, differential treatment.
What Qualifies as Disparate Treatment
The definition centers on intentional discrimination. Courts have established that disparate treatment means treating some people less favorably than others because of their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. For this type of claim, the central question is whether the plaintiff was subjected to different treatment because of their protected status.
Caregiver status itself is not federally protected. Federal employment discrimination laws do not prohibit employment discrimination based solely on caregiver status. However, caregiver discrimination violates federal laws when it intersects with sex, race, age, disability, or other protected characteristics. California provides broader protections than federal law, which we'll examine in the next section.
How Caregiver Discrimination Manifests in the Workplace
Caregiver discrimination, sometimes called Family Responsibilities Discrimination, appears in multiple ways. A pregnant worker might be removed from the schedule because her boss assumes she won't care about her job after giving birth. A new father could face termination after parental leave, with his boss stating that men shouldn't stay home with their kids. Hiring managers might ghost applicants after learning about caregiving responsibilities, fearing increased insurance costs.
The discrimination extends to daily workplace decisions. Managers may block lactation breaks while permitting smoke breaks for other employees. When a worker reveals a spouse's cancer diagnosis, supervisors might start tracking every minute of their time, exaggerating issues to justify termination. Parents can be denied promotions simply because they have children, with employers assuming they won't travel for work.
These actions stem from caregiver bias, which can be conscious or unconscious. Employers often assume that someone caring for a family member will not reliably prioritize work over caregiving responsibilities. This bias influences hiring, firing, promotions, and the allocation of day-to-day responsibilities.
The Motherhood Penalty and Fatherhood Assumptions
The motherhood penalty creates measurable economic harm. Employed mothers were paid just 62.5 cents per dollar paid to fathers in 2022. Mothers working full-time year-round earned 71.4 cents compared to fathers. Each child under five years old reduces a typical mother's earnings by 15 percent.
Research shows the motherhood penalty accounts for nearly 80 percent of the gender pay gap. Mothers face lower hiring rates and fewer promotions compared to women without children. They're perceived as less competent, less committed, and unsuitable for leadership roles. Pregnant women are judged as less dependable, less authoritative, more emotional, and more irrational than non-pregnant managers.
Fathers, conversely, often experience a fatherhood premium. Fatherhood is associated with pay increases, particularly within the same employer. Employers view fathers as having greater financial responsibility and higher motivation, seeing them as more devoted than childless men. However, fathers who take paternity leave or request flexible arrangements can face backlash, being viewed as less masculine and less promotable.
Research reveals that expectant fathers do experience discrimination, though it's often subtle. They might be excluded from high-profile projects or face social isolation due to their partner's pregnancy. For every one-point increase in a father's perceived discrimination, the odds of the mother leaving her job rose by 4%. This creates a cycle where discrimination against fathers pushes mothers out of the workforce entirely.
California Laws Protecting Caregivers from Disparate Treatment
No single law explicitly protects caregivers as a standalone category. Employers can penalize or terminate working parents and other employees because of their caregiving responsibilities without facing legal consequences, unless their actions violate other employment laws. California caregivers must instead rely on claims for pregnancy discrimination, sex stereotyping, and associational disability discrimination to fight disparate treatment.
FEHA: California's Broader Protections
The Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) applies to employers with five or more employees. This lower threshold means more California workers receive protection compared to federal laws, which typically require 15 employees. FEHA prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, sex, disability, medical condition, and numerous other protected characteristics.
While FEHA doesn't currently list "caregiver" as a protected category, Assembly Bill 524 changes this framework. The bill amends FEHA to prohibit employment discrimination based on family caregiver status, defining it as providing direct care to a spouse, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, domestic partner, or designated person. This legislation recognizes the opportunity to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination because of family caregiver status as a civil right.
FEHA also prohibits associational disability discrimination. Courts ruled that FEHA protects employees who face adverse actions for associating with disabled individuals. In one case, an employer terminated an employee after he requested leave to donate a kidney to his sister. FEHA arguably provides non-disabled employees associated with a disabled person a right to reasonable accommodation, going further than federal law.
CFRA and Pregnancy Disability Leave Law
The California Family Rights Act requires employers of five or more employees to provide eligible workers with 12 weeks of job-protected leave during a 12-month period. Eligibility requires one year of service and 1,250 hours worked in the past year. CFRA covers leave for your own serious health condition, to care for family members with serious health conditions, or to bond with a newborn, adopted, or foster child.
CFRA protects a broader range of family relationships than federal law. You can take leave to care for a child of any age, spouse, domestic partner, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, or a designated person with a blood or family-like relationship.
The Pregnancy Disability Leave Law provides an additional four months of job-protected leave for employees disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions. All employers with five or more employees must provide PDL, with no tenure requirement. After PDL ends, eligible employees can take up to 12 weeks of CFRA leave to bond with their child.
Employees can bring two types of claims under CFRA and PDL: retaliation claims and interference claims. Retaliation claims arise when an employer fires or discriminates against an employee for taking protected leave. Interference claims involve employers blocking or denying the right to take leave.
Kin Care Law and Sick Leave Protections
California Labor Code Section 233, the Kin Care Law, protects employees' right to use sick leave to care for family members. Section 246.5, part of the Healthy Workplaces Healthy Families Act, provides additional protections. An employer who terminates a working father for taking sick leave to care for his children could face liability under both statutes.
Employees can use up to half of their accrued sick leave as kin care leave. Family members covered include children, parents, spouses, domestic partners, grandparents, grandchildren, siblings, and designated persons. Employers cannot demote, terminate, refuse to rehire, fail to promote, suspend, or discriminate against employees for proper use of kin care leave.
How California Laws Differ from Federal Protections
California law provides stronger protections than federal standards in several ways. CFRA applies to employers with five employees, while the Family and Medical Leave Act requires 50 employees within a 75-mile radius. CFRA covers more family relationships, including domestic partners, grandparents, grandchildren, siblings, and designated persons. Federal law limits family care leave to spouses, children, and parents.
FEHA's five-employee threshold contrasts sharply with Title VII's 15-employee requirement. FEHA includes protected categories not explicitly covered under federal law, such as medical condition and genetic information. FEHA imposes no cap on compensatory or punitive damages, while federal law caps damages based on employer size.
Associational Disability Discrimination Rights
Associational disability discrimination represents a powerful protection for California caregivers facing disparate treatment. FEHA defines physical disability to include a perception that the person is associated with someone who has a physical disability. In effect, association with a disabled person is itself considered a disability under California law.
The Three Categories of Associational Claims
Courts recognize three distinct types of associational discrimination claims. The expense category applies when an employer takes adverse action to avoid health insurance costs for an employee's disabled family member. Self-insured employers face particular risk since they directly bear medical expenses. In one case, an employer fired longtime employees shortly after learning their son's cancer had relapsed, with evidence showing insurance costs factored into each employee's budget line.
Disability by association claims involve employers who fear an employee might contract a disability through exposure or genetic predisposition. Courts have ruled that employers cannot suspend or terminate workers based on fears about their association with someone who has AIDS.
The distraction category, the most common claim type, addresses situations where employers believe an employee is inattentive due to caregiving responsibilities. However, employers can still discipline workers for actual poor performance, not anticipated future problems. An employee terminated after taking emergency leave three times in three months to care for his disabled father successfully raised a triable issue of associational discrimination.
California's Expanded Reasonable Accommodation Rights
California law diverges significantly from federal standards. Under FEHA, someone associated with a person with a disability is themselves considered disabled and may be entitled to reasonable accommodation. The Castro-Ramirez case established that employers must engage in the interactive process with employees who care for disabled family members.
Federal ADA explicitly prohibits discrimination but does not require reasonable accommodation for non-disabled employees associated with disabled persons. California courts, however, have interpreted FEHA to create this accommodation duty.
When Your Family Member's Disability Affects Your Job
Establishing an associational discrimination claim requires proving several elements. You must show you were qualified for the job, suffered an adverse employment action, your employer knew about your association with a disabled person, and circumstances suggest the disability was a determining factor. Notably, you must demonstrate ability to perform essential job duties with or without reasonable accommodation.
Employers must initiate the interactive process in good faith and explore accommodations before making termination decisions. Failure to engage in this process provides grounds for successful discrimination claims.
Recognizing Sex Stereotyping and Gender-Based Discrimination
Caregiver bias generally stems from assumptions about how caregivers will act, such as mothers prioritizing families over work, or how they should act, such as fathers not taking time off. These stereotypes form the basis of sex discrimination claims when employers base decisions on gendered expectations rather than individual performance.
Maternal Wall Discrimination
Professor Joan Williams coined the term "maternal wall" to describe the barrier preventing mothers from advancing in the workplace. This discrimination manifests through inflexible policies and practices developed during single-earner household eras.
In Back v. Hastings on Hudson Free Unified School District, the Second Circuit established that comparator evidence is not necessary because stereotyping of women as caregivers can by itself be evidence of an impermissible, sex-based motive. School psychologist Elana Back was denied tenure after supervisors told her "this was perhaps not the job or the school district for her if she had 'little ones,'" and that "it was not possible for [her] to be a good mother and have this job". The court ruled these statements constituted unlawful sex discrimination.
Paternal Caregiving Penalties
Fathers pursuing active caregiving roles face their own set of penalties. Men worry about being "daddy tracked," experiencing microaggressions that demotivate workers or inspire them to find another job. Previous research found that men taking paternity leave or asking for flexible arrangements face backlash, being seen as less masculine and ultimately less promotable.
These comments often come from older male bosses or women leaders who endured misogyny to advance in their careers. The discrimination against expectant fathers is often subtle, including exclusion or social isolation due to their partner's pregnancy.
Disparate Parental Leave Policies
JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay $5 million in a Title VII class action after presumptively treating biological mothers as "primary caregivers" with sixteen weeks of paid leave, while fathers received only two weeks as presumed "non-primary caregivers". Such policies violate federal law because they rely on pervasive sex-role stereotypes that caring for family members is women's work.
Parents of either sex may challenge policies that explicitly treat mothers and fathers differently or have disparate impact.
Taking Action: Your Rights and Legal Remedies
Taking legal action requires understanding California's specific filing procedures and deadlines. The state offers remedies beyond federal protections, with recent legislation expanding caregiver rights even further.
Filing FEHA and CFRA Claims
Employment cases require submitting an intake form to the California Civil Rights Department within three years of the date you were last harmed. You must obtain a Right-to-Sue notice from CRD before filing your own lawsuit in court. Filing online through CRD's California Civil Rights System offers the fastest method, allowing self-service scheduling and document uploads. Alternatively, you can file by email, mail, or phone.
CRD investigates complaints and attempts resolution through conciliation or mediation. If reasonable cause exists, parties typically proceed to mediation before potential litigation.
Building Your Discrimination Case
Document everything immediately. Keep detailed records of discriminatory incidents, including dates, times, witnesses, and exact statements. This documentation becomes your strongest evidence. Attorneys can request documents and records that state agencies cannot access.
When to Seek Legal Counsel
Consult an employment attorney if you experience negative comments about caregiving responsibilities, exclusion from opportunities after disclosing family needs, or retaliation for requesting flexibility. Early legal guidance proves crucial, particularly given that the average cost for a small employer to defend a single plaintiff discrimination claim reached $160,000.
New California Legislation Strengthening Protections
AB 524 designates family caregiver status as a protected class under FEHA. Liability includes compensatory damages, injunctive relief, punitive damages, and attorney's fees.
Conclusion
California caregivers face real discrimination, but you have powerful legal protections that extend far beyond federal standards. FEHA, CFRA, and the new AB 524 legislation create multiple pathways to challenge unfair treatment based on caregiving responsibilities, sex stereotyping, and associational disability discrimination.
Document every incident carefully, including dates, witnesses, and exact statements. This evidence becomes critical if you decide to pursue a claim. While employers often assume caregivers will underperform or leave, these assumptions violate California law when they drive employment decisions.
Consequently, you should consult an employment attorney the moment you notice discriminatory patterns. Early legal guidance helps you protect your rights and hold employers accountable for caregiver bias.
References
[1] – https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/disparate_treatment
[3] – https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2025/04/21/bias-against-expectant-dads-can-impact-moms-careers-study-says/
[4] – https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/employment/
[7] – https://sjud.senate.ca.gov/sites/sjud.senate.ca.gov/files/ab_524_sjud_analysis_updated.pdf
[8] – https://calcivilrights.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2022/12/Pregnancy-Disability-Leave-Fact-Sheet_ENG.pdf
