(April 22, 2009) The California Chamber of Commerce will be urging members of the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee not to move several bad bills forward, and is asking CalChamber members to make the same request.
The Assembly committee will be considering the following CalChamber-opposed bills:
- AB 838 (Swanson; D-Oakland) directs Cal/OSHA to draft an unnecessary regulation to address exposure to excessive heat in indoor workplaces.
- AB 842 (Swanson; D-Oakland) expands mandates and increases liability for employers related to the state version of federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act of 1988.
- AB 943 (Mendoza; D-Artesia) unduly restricts the ability of businesses to use all legally available information in employment decisions, including consumer credit reports.
- AB 1000 (Ma; D-San Francisco) unreasonably expands employers’ costs and liability for a new protected and paid sick leave for employees.
Visit www.calchambervotes.com to send a letter.
AB 838, Indoor Heat Illness
Current law already requires all employers to address workplace hazards, including and especially those hazards that are unique to each workplace. The premise of the Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) is that Cal/OSHA recognizes that a one-size-fits-all safety program will not effectively protect employees across all industries. Therefore, the IIPP specifically requires all employers to develop a safety program to identify and mitigate safety hazards in the workplace and to train employees about the hazards. Indoor heat exposure is especially suited to the IIPP to ensure employee safety in these unique environments. Creating yet another set of regulations to apply to all employers, even where excessive heat exposure is not present, would impose an unnecessary burden on employers.
Send a letter.
AB 842, WARN Act
California law regarding notice of mass layoffs or plant closings is already more stringent than federal law. A 60-day notice requirement under the federal WARN Act triggers when an industrial facility with more than 100 workers closes or relocates, and the action affects 50 or more employees. Current California law requires 60-day advance notice for facilities that employ 75 or more employees. This bill proposes to further broaden the notice requirements to be triggered 90 days in advance for a layoff, relocation or termination.
California employers are already unreasonably subjected to more stringent requirements than the federal WARN Act requires. AB 842 further disadvantages California employers by ignoring key federal provisions, further expanding employer administrative requirements and increasing exposure to liability. This bill makes doing business in California more onerous at a time when California should be seeking solutions to the current economic challenges rather than creating new costs and liabilities for employers.
Send a letter.
AB 943, Consumer Credit Reports
AB 943 prohibits employers from using consumer credit reports for employment purposes unless the information is “substantially job related,” which is defined narrowly and unless the position being sought is managerial, with a city or county, with law enforcement, or required by law to request a report.
It is important to note the distinction between a consumer credit report used to evaluate creditworthiness for the purpose of granting credit and the employment report provided to an employer for employment purposes. The employment report does not include credit scores or account numbers.
The California Civil Code and the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) provide Californians with extensive rights regarding the use of consumer credit reports. At any time, any persons may request a copy of the credit report and dispute any information that they believe is incorrect. n the employment context, the law recognizes the use of credit reports as legitimate and extends rights to protect those consumers as well. Before obtaining a credit report, the prospective employer must disclose in writing that a credit report may be obtained for employment purposes and obtain from the applicant the written authorization to order the credit report. Furthermore, in California the employer must also offer the applicant a copy of the credit report free of charge. Knowing full well that his/her credit information will be evaluated as it relates to employment, an applicant may wish to provide an explanation of any potentially adverse credit information to the employer or to the consumer reporting agency. According to the FCRA, consumers at any time are allowed to include in their report up to a 100-word explanation of their credit situation.
Since credit scores are not used for employment screening, and the employer is not evaluating creditworthiness to grant credit, a thin credit file would not generally disadvantage a job applicant.
Send a letter.
AB 1000, Sick Leave Mandate
AB 1000 mandates that all employers provide paid sick leave to an employee after seven days of work in a calendar year to care for the employee’s own illness, or to provide care to a sick child, spouse, domestic partner or other relative. The mandate would extend to all employers and all employees, as specified. There are no exceptions. The provisions of this bill will have an impact on all employers, large and small, regardless of the level of sick leave currently provided.
The impact of AB 1000 is not exclusive to private employers. Because of both the administrative burdens and the additional cost to provide sick leave, public employers believe that AB 1000 will severely restrict the use of part-time, temporary and seasonal employees, further slowing economic recovery. This loss of flexibility also will increase costs and reduce efficiencies in the delivery of services to the public by cities and counties. For counties, AB 1000 poses a particular problem for In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) providers. The IHSS program is already facing significant budget shortfalls due to the state’s overall fiscal condition. The program cannot sustain additional pressure created by the requirement that either sick leave or pay in lieu of sick leave be given to approximately 300,000 providers.
Send a letter.
Action Needed
These bills will be heard in the Assembly Labor and Employment Committee today.
The CalChamber urges members to ask legislators on Assembly Labor and Employment to oppose AB 838, AB 842, AB 943 and AB 1000.
Staff Contact: Marti Fisher