Remote work has fundamentally changed the workplace, but it has also created increasingly complicated legal questions for both employers and employees.
If a California company employs someone who works remotely from another state, which state's employment laws apply? Can a remote employee invoke California's worker protections simply because the employer is headquartered in California? And where does an employment decision legally "occur" when managers and employees are located in different states?
A recent California Court of Appeal decision provides important guidance.
California Court Addresses Employment Rights of Out-of-State Remote Workers
In Saberin v. Alation, Inc., decided July 30, 2026, the California Court of Appeal considered whether certain California employment protections applied to an employee who worked remotely outside California.
The employee worked remotely from Utah for a company with California ties. After being arrested in Florida, he was later terminated. The criminal matter was ultimately dismissed.
The employee alleged that his termination violated California laws restricting employers from using certain arrest records that did not result in conviction when making employment decisions.
The central issue, however, became broader:
When can California employment law protect an employee who lives and works outside California?
The Court concluded that the California statutes at issue could not be applied to the employee's claims under the circumstances presented. Among other considerations, the employee lived and worked in Utah, the arrest occurred in Florida, and the relevant termination decision was made outside California.
The decision illustrates an increasingly important reality: a company's connection to California does not necessarily mean every California employment protection automatically applies to every remote employee.
Why This Matters for California Employers
For businesses with employees working remotely throughout the United States, employment decisions can now involve multiple jurisdictions at once.
An employee may have been hired through a California office, report to a manager in another state, perform work from a third state, and have a termination or disciplinary decision made by executives located somewhere else entirely.
That can create significant legal exposure.
Before hiring, disciplining, investigating, or terminating remote employees, employers should consider questions including:
- Where does the employee actually perform the work?
- Where are the managers making the employment decision located?
- Which state's wage-and-hour, discrimination, leave, privacy, and termination laws potentially apply?
- What does the employment agreement say about governing law?
- Is there an enforceable arbitration agreement?
- Are background checks or criminal-history information being used in an employment decision?
- Has the employee recently complained about discrimination, harassment, wages, workplace safety, or other potentially protected conduct?
A termination that appears routine from a business perspective can become significantly more complicated when several states' employment laws potentially intersect.
What Remote Employees Should Know
Employees should likewise avoid assuming that working for a California company automatically gives them the full protection of California employment law.
The analysis may depend on considerably more than the location of corporate headquarters.
Where the employee works, where the alleged wrongful conduct occurred, where the relevant decision makers were located, the specific law involved, and the terms of the employment relationship may all become important.
Employees who believe they have been wrongfully terminated, retaliated against, discriminated against, or denied wages should therefore evaluate their rights under the laws that may actually govern their employment.
This is particularly important for executives, professionals, sales employees, technology workers, and other employees who work remotely across state lines.
Criminal History and Employment Decisions Require Additional Caution
Saberin also highlights another area in which employers and employees frequently encounter disputes: the use of arrest and criminal-history information.
California law places substantial restrictions on how covered employers may obtain and use certain criminal-history information in employment decisions. The rules surrounding arrests that do not result in conviction can be particularly important.
Employers should therefore exercise caution before relying on information discovered through online searches, background investigations, or other sources when making hiring, disciplinary, or termination decisions.
Employees who believe an employer improperly relied upon an arrest or other protected criminal-history information should likewise consider obtaining legal advice regarding the circumstances surrounding the employment decision.
Remote Work Has Made Employment Litigation More Complex
Remote work may eliminate the office, but it does not eliminate employment-law obligations.
Instead, distributed workforces can make those obligations more complicated.
For employers, the question is increasingly not simply "What does California law require?" but "Which laws apply to this particular employee and this particular employment decision?"
For employees, determining whether a termination or other workplace action was unlawful may similarly require analyzing where the employee worked, where decisions were made, what conduct occurred, and which jurisdiction's laws govern the dispute.
These questions are often highly fact-specific, and they can become particularly consequential once a termination, discrimination, retaliation, wage-and-hour, or business dispute develops into litigation.
California Employment Attorneys Representing Employers and Employees
The Law Offices of Paul P. Cheng & Associates represents both employers and employees in California employment disputes, including matters involving: wrongful termination, workplace retaliation, discrimination and harassment, wage-and-hour disputes, employment agreements, executive and employee disputes, arbitration, workplace investigations, and employment litigation.
Representing clients on both sides of employment disputes gives our attorneys perspective into how workplace claims are evaluated, defended, negotiated, and litigated.
The firm's practice is focused on litigation and trial advocacy, including complex employment and business disputes.
If you are an employer facing a significant workplace dispute or an employee who believes your employment rights have been violated, obtaining legal advice early can help identify potential claims, defenses, and strategic options before the dispute escalates.
Law Offices of Paul P. Cheng & Associates
Employment & Business Litigation | Pasadena, California
Serving employers, businesses, executives, professionals, and employees throughout California
This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. Employment laws and their application depend on the specific facts and circumstances of each matter.