Wiser Workplace

California Stay or Pay Contracts Banned Under AB 692: What Workers Need to Know

Wiser Workplace is not a law firm and does not provide legal representation. This article is general educational information about California employment law, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, consult a licensed California attorney. Employment law changes often, and this article reflects our understanding as of the date shown above; verify that it is still current before relying on it.

Wiser Workplace Editorial Team

Imagine you just started a new job. Your employer paid for some training and gave you a signing bonus. Six months later, you realize the job is not what you were promised, but when you try to leave, your employer hands you a bill for thousands of dollars. Under the old rules in California, that kind of arrangement was often perfectly legal. As of January 1, 2026, a new law changes the picture significantly.

Assembly Bill 692 (AB 692) places strict limits on what California calls "stay or pay" provisions in employment contracts. These are the clauses that require workers to repay their employer for things like training costs, relocation expenses, or signing bonuses if they leave before a certain date. If you work in California, here is what this law means for you.

What Are "Stay or Pay" Contracts?

A "stay or pay" provision is any clause in an employment agreement that requires a worker to pay the employer money if they leave their job before a specified period of time. These clauses go by many names. You might see them called training repayment agreement provisions (TRAPs), clawback clauses, or retention agreements.

Common examples include:

These arrangements can trap workers in jobs they want to leave. A worker earning $20 an hour who owes $15,000 in "training costs" may feel like they cannot afford to quit, even if they are experiencing unsafe conditions, harassment, or other serious problems. AB 692 was designed to address exactly that kind of situation.

What Does AB 692 Actually Do?

The new law, codified in Business and Professions Code Section 16608 (and Labor Code Section 926), broadly prohibits employers from entering into agreements that require workers to repay training costs, sign-on bonuses, relocation expenses, or other employment-related benefits if the worker leaves before a set date. The law applies to agreements entered into on or after January 1, 2026.

The term "worker" is defined broadly under the statute. It covers employees, prospective employees, and other individuals permitted to work for an employer or participate in job training programs. This means the law could potentially protect people even before they officially start the job.

The law does not apply retroactively. If you signed a stay or pay agreement before January 1, 2026, that agreement may still be enforceable under the rules that were in place at the time. However, any new agreement entered into on or after that date must comply with AB 692.

Are There Any Exceptions?

AB 692 does not ban every type of repayment arrangement. Business and Professions Code § 16608(b)(2) carves out five categories. Two of them carry detailed conditions and are the ones most workers will encounter, so they are set out in full below. The other three are flat exclusions:

That matters in both directions. A worker in an approved apprenticeship, or one whose employer helped finance a home, should not read the ban as voiding those arrangements. Equally, an employer cannot relabel an ordinary training-repayment clause as one of these to escape the statute.

Sign-On and Retention Bonuses (subd. (b)(2)(D))

Employers may still offer sign-on or retention bonuses with repayment terms, but only if several requirements are met:

Tuition Reimbursement for Transferable Credentials (subd. (b)(2)(B))

Employers may still require repayment of tuition or credential costs, but again with conditions:

The distinction around "transferable" credentials is important. If the training only helps you do this one job at this one company, the employer generally cannot require you to pay for it. If the credential is something you carry with you to future jobs, a limited repayment arrangement may still be allowed.

What Happens If an Employer Violates AB 692?

This is where the law has real teeth. AB 692 creates a private right of action, meaning affected workers can file a lawsuit. AB 692 was chaptered as Stats. 2025, ch. 703. It adds Business and Professions Code section 16608, which carries the prohibition, and Labor Code section 926, which carries the remedy. Both apply to contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2026. Section 926 makes a violator liable for "actual damages sustained by the worker or workers on whose behalf the case is brought, or five thousand dollars ($5,000) per worker, whichever is greater, in addition to injunctive relief, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs." So the law provides for:

The law also allows "worker representatives" to bring claims on behalf of multiple workers in similar situations. This opens the door to class-style enforcement actions, which could create significant financial exposure for employers who continue to use non-compliant agreements.

What This Means for Employees

If you signed a new employment agreement on or after January 1, 2026, take a close look at whether it contains any repayment or clawback provisions. Here are some practical steps:

What This Means for Employers

Employers should review their existing agreement templates and update them to comply with AB 692. A few key points:

How This Fits Into California's Broader Worker Protections

AB 692 is part of a pattern. California has long been one of the most protective states in the country when it comes to non-compete agreements, which the state has banned since 1872, first under former Civil Code section 1673 and, since section 16600 was added in 1941, under Business and Professions Code section 16600. The logic is similar: California wants workers to be free to move between jobs without being locked in by financial penalties.

Combined with the state's strong protections against retaliation, wrongful termination, and wage theft, AB 692 adds another layer of protection for workers who want to leave a bad situation without facing a financial penalty for doing so.

How Wiser Workplace Can Help

Disputes over stay or pay agreements can be stressful and confusing. You may not be sure whether your agreement is enforceable or whether your employer's demands are legal under the new law. In many cases, these kinds of disputes can be resolved through mediation before they escalate into a lawsuit.

Wiser Workplace offers an accessible, confidential dispute resolution process for California employment issues. If you are dealing with a stay or pay dispute, or any other workplace concern, you can join the launch waitlist and explore your options.

Legal Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. While we aim to provide accurate information about California employment law, employment law is complex and constantly evolving. Every situation is unique. This platform does not provide legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. About the legal citations on this page. Statutory and case citations are given so you can find and read the underlying law yourself, and they are offered for reference only. Verify any citation you intend to rely on against the official source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov for California statutes, and the official reporters or the courts' own published opinions for cases. Codes are amended and cases are reviewed, depublished, or distinguished, so a citation that was accurate when this page was written may not be current. A summary of a provision is never a substitute for its text, and nothing here should be relied on without independent verification.