ALRIGHT WELCOME TO ASSEMBLY,
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE
HEARING. SERGEANT, PLEASE CALL
THE ABSENT MEMBERS. YES. UH I
HAVE ONE ANNOUNCEMENT. I WOULD
LIKE TO WELCOME AND INTRODUCE
OUR NEW CONSULTANT AARON HICKEY.
WELCOME HER. IT'S OUR FIRST
MEETING. REMINDER FOR OUR
WITNESS POLICY FOR EACH BILL. WE
WILL TAKE 22 PRIMARY WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT AND TWO PRIMARY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION. EACH
PRIMARY WITNESS WILL GET UP TO
TWO MINUTES EACH. FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT. WE ASK THAT YOU STATE
YOUR NAME, AFFILIATION AND
POSITION ON THE BILL. WE
OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE A QUORUM,
SO WE'RE GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET
STARTED AS A SUB COMMITTEE. OK?
SOMETHING. ALL RIGHT, SO WE'LL
HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER RODRIGUEZ,
WHO IS HERE. UM PLEASE COME UP
AND OPEN WITH YOUR BET.
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS. THANK YOU
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A
B 1843, WHICH WOULD
SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE AND EXPAND
THE MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL SUPPORT
OPTIONS AVAILABLE FOR OUR EM S¼
WORKERS IN THE PRIVATE AMBULANCE
COMPANIES WITH OVER 35 YEARS
WORKING IN THE EM S¼ FIELD, I
KNOW FIRSTHAND THE DIFFICULTIES
OF BEING A FIRST RESPONDER AND
ENCOUNTERING TRAUMATIC INCIDENTS
DAILY. WE ARE CONSTANTLY EXPOSED
TO DEATH, SEVERE INJURIES AND
LIFE THREATENING CONDITIONS, ALL
WHILE WORKING LONG, IRREGULAR
HOURS. THIS COMBINATION OF
FACTORS CREATES STRESSFUL HOME
AND WORK ENVIRONMENTS. AND 2018.
THE VOTERS APPROVED PROPOSITION
11, WHICH PROVIDED PRIVATE
EMERGENCY AMBULANCE EMPLOYEES UP
TO 10 EMPLOYER PAID MENTAL
HEALTH SESSIONS THROUGH AN AN
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND
EAP. HOWEVER THESE RESOURCES
HAVE BEEN INADEQUATE OR
DIFFICULT TO ACCESS. FOR EXAMPLE
, EM S¼ WORKERS CANNOT ACCESS
PROVIDERS WHO SPECIALIZE IN
THEIR FIRST RESPONDER RELATED
ISSUES. AS A RESULT, THESE
WORKERS ARE OFTEN USED ARE OFTEN
USING THEIR LIMITED EAP SESSION
JUST TO FIND THE APPROPRIATE
PROVIDER TO SERVE THEIR NEEDS.
THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION FOUND THAT 15 TO 20
SESSIONS ARE NEEDED FOR OUR
FIRST RESPONDERS TO BEGIN
RECOVERING FROM DIAGNOSED P Tð
S¼ Dð INCURRED ON THE JOB,
THEREFORE THE CURRENT ALLOCATION
OF UP TO 10 MENTAL HEALTH
TREATMENTS PER ISSUE IS
INSUFFICIENT. ADDITIONALLY
PRIVATE AMBULANCE AND POLICE
FACE CHALLENGING CHALLENGES AND
SCHEDULING APPOINTMENTS FOR
PROVIDERS IN A TIMELY MANNER.
THIS BILL REQUIRE APPOINTMENTS
TO BE SCHEDULED WITHIN 48 HOURS
UPON REQUEST TO ENSURE PRIVATE
AMBULANCE EMPLOYEES RECEIVE
TIMELY CARE. A B 1418 43 WOULD
ALSO REQUIRE PEER TO PEER
SUPPORT SERVICES TO BE AVAILABLE
FOR PRIVATE AMBULANCE EMPLOYEES
PEER TO PEER SUPPORT SERVICES
ARE HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PROGRAM IN
WHICH TRAINED COLLEAGUES OFFER
EMOTIONAL AND SOCIAL SUPPORT TO
THEIR PEERS. UNFORTUNATELY IN A
2016 SURVEY BY THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION FOR EM Tð S¼ FOUND
THAT ONLY 28% OF AGENCIES
NATIONWIDE ADOPTED PEER TO PEER
SUPPORT PROGRAMS. WITH A B 1840
THREE. OUR FIRST RESPONDERS WILL
HAVE THE RESOURCES TO SUPPORT
THE NEED TO ADDRESS THEIR MENTAL
HEALTH NEEDS TO RECOVER SO THEY
CAN CONTINUE PROVIDING
CALIFORNIANS WITH EMERGENCY CARE
AND SERVICE THEY DESERVE. A B
1843 WERE IMPROVE AND EXPAND THE
MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL PORT
OPTIONS FOR OUR EM S¼ WORKERS IN
THE PRIVATE AMBULANCE SERVICE.
WITH ME TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY ARE
JACK GANDEL ACTING PRESIDENT AND
A REGIONAL NATIONAL
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EM,
Tð, S¼ AND PARAMEDICS AND LEE
ALAMEDA, PRESIDENT OF THE
TURLOCK EMERGENCY AND MEDICAL
SERVICE ASSOCIATION. LOCAL OF
THE UNITED STEEL WORKERS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU BEFORE WE HAVE
OUR WITNESSES. I WOULD LIKE TO
ESTABLISH QUORUM SECRETARY,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. ORTEGA
HERE, FLORA ALANIS. WENDY
CARRILLO. LE WARD. ZER. FORM
ESTABLISHED. DEPARTMENT HAS
ESTABLISHED. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD
, HØI. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON
, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS JACK
YANDEL AND I HAVE BEEN AN EM Tð
IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY FOR THE
LAST 16 YEARS. TODAY. I AM
SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EM,
Tð, S¼ AND PARAMEDICS OR IAP.
AND THE OVER THREE 1000 EM S¼
PROFESSIONALS WE REPRESENT
ACROSS CALIFORNIA. I WOULD LIKE
TO EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT OF
ASSEMBLY BILL 1840 THREE, A BILL
THAT SEEKS TO EXPAND THE
EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. OR
E, A SESSIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
AVAILABLE TO EM S¼ PROFESSIONALS
IN THE STATE. WE BELIEVE THAT
THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE CRITICAL
TREATMENT ADVICE AND SUPPORT TO
THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO PUT THEIR
LIVES ON THE LINE EACH DAY TO
PROVIDE HEALTH AND SAFETY TO
THEIR COMMUNITIES. AS YOU KNOW,
EMTS AND PARAMEDICS ARE THE
FIRST POINT OF CONTACT FOR A
PERSON IN NEED OF EMERGENCY
RESOURCES. EM S¼ PROVIDERS ARE
ON THE FRONT LINE TO HELP
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO ARE
OFTEN EXPERIENCING SOME OF THE
WORST MOMENTS OF THEIR LIFE. THE
VARIOUS OFTEN DEVASTATING
SITUATIONS IN WHICH FIRST
RESPONDERS MUST RESPOND TO THESE
CALLS FOR HELP, OFTEN
UNDERSTANDABLY TAKES A TOLL ON
THEIR MENTAL HEALTH, LIKE IN THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF HEALTH
REPORTS THAT EM S¼ PERSONNEL ARE
30% MORE LIKELY TO EXPERIENCE
DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY THAN THE
AVERAGE PERSON. A B 1840 THREE
PROPOSES THAT THESE EAP S¼ BE
MORE WIDELY AND IMMEDIATELY
AVAILABLE TO EM S¼ PROVIDERS
WITH MORE ENFORCED STANDARDS OF
CARE AND ACCOUNTABILITY. THIS
EXPANSION AND OVERSIGHT COULD BE
A VITAL COULD BE VITAL IN
ALLEVIATING MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS
AT THE SOURCE AND IN TURN,
IMPROVE WORKPLACE ATTENDANCE AND
ENGAGEMENT, LIFE SATISFACTION
AND LOST PRODUCTIVE TIME ACROSS
THE BOARD. SIMPLY PUT
RECOGNIZING AND ADDRESSING THIS
NEED FOR EXPANDED MENTAL HEALTH
SUPPORT FOR EM S¼ PROVIDERS
THROUGH A B 1840 THREE CAN ONLY
STAND TO STRENGTHEN THE OVERALL
HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OUR STATE.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS LEE ALAMEDA. AND I AM
THE PRESIDENT OF Tð U S¼ W LOCAL
12 9 11 IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY. I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK TO YOU TODAY ON BEHALF OF
MY LOCAL MEMBERS AND OUR
SIBLINGS OF US W LOCAL 1853 IN
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. EVERY DAY.
OUR MEMBERS LEAVE FOR WORK, NOT
KNOWING WHAT TYPE OF SITUATION
WE WILL BE ENCOUNTERED THAT DAY.
THE ONE THING WE DO KNOW IS THAT
THE DEDICATION AND CARE WE
PROVIDE WITH MULTIPLE
COMMUNITIES CAN MEAN THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIFE AND
DEATH. AS FIRST RESPONDERS. IT
IS OUR PRIVILEGE TO SERVE OUR
PATIENTS WITH THE BEST CARE
POSSIBLE. UNFORTUNATELY THE CARE
THAT MAY BE NEEDED BY US IS NOT
GIVEN THE SAME CONSIDERATION OR
COMMITMENT. IT IS THE REASON I
AM HERE TODAY TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT OF A B 1 804 THREE TO
ENSURE THAT ACCESS AND FOLLOW
THROUGH TO RECEIVE MENTAL HEALTH
CARE AND EFFECTIVE EAP PROGRAM
ADMINISTRATION RESPONSIBLY IS
ACHIEVED FOR FIRST RESPONDERS
WITHOUT DELAY. A B 184 THREE
PROVIDES A CRITICAL PATHWAY TO
ACHIEVE THESE MUCH NEEDED
SERVICES. CURRENTLY WE HAVE
MEMBERS WHO HAVE AFTER MONTHS OF
FOLLOW UP, STILL UNABLE TO GET
AN APPOINTMENT OR RECEIVE ANY
EAP ASSISTANCE. REPEATEDLY THEY
HAVE BEEN TOLD BY PROGRAM
FACILITATORS. THERE ISN'T ENOUGH
AVAILABLE. THERE AREN'T I'M
SORRY, THERE ISN'T ANYONE
AVAILABLE TO SEE THEM AND TO
FOLLOW UP MONTHLY ON THEIR OWN
TO NÓ AVAIL. IT DEFEATS THE
PURPOSE OF AN E A IF THE MENTAL
HEALTH CARE NEEDED ISN'T THERE
FOR MONTHS ON END OR AT ALL? AS
WE PERFORM OUR JOBS AT PLACES
DIRECTLY INTO VOLATILE,
DANGEROUS SITUATIONS THAT P Tð
S¼ Dð AFFECTS AND IMPACTS OUR
VERY REAL. WE NEED OUR SERVICES
IMMEDIATELY. RESPONDING TO
CRITICAL INCIDENT IS WHAT WE DO
EACH DAY. OURSELVES AT RISK
WITHOUT ANY THOUGHT. OTHER THAN
SAVING LIVES TODAY, WE ASK
SUPPORT A B 1840 THREE TO ENSURE
OUR MEMBERS HAVE IMMEDIATE
ACCESS TO WHAT THEY NEED TO
POTENTIALLY SAVE THEIR OWN LIVES
WHEN EXPERIENCING THEIR MOST
DIFFICULT CHALLENGES. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE
ON BEHALF OF THE FIRST
RESPONDERS WHO NEED THIS FOR
THEIR MENTAL HEALTH AND WELL
BEING. THANK YOU TO ASSEMBLY
MEMBER RODRIGUEZ FOR AUTHORIZING
THIS CRUCIAL BILL AND THANK YOU
CHAIR AND MEMBERS FOR YOUR TIME
AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU.
UH, NOW WE WILL MOVE TO
ADDITIONAL WITNESS AND SUPPORT
OF A B 1840 THREE. WE ASK THAT
YOU JUST STATE YOUR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
BILL. HØI GOOD AFTERNOON. JANICE
O'MALLEY WITH ASKS ME,
CALIFORNIA HERE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. HELLO CATHERINE VÀ
HOUSTON ON BEHALF OF UNITED
STEEL WORKERS DISTRICT 12 AND U
S¼ W LOCAL 1850 THREE AND STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE
ANY MAIN WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION?
GOOD AFTERNOON. HØI MICHAEL.
YEAH GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M SEAN
HENSHALL HERE. ON BEHALF OF
AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE,
CALIFORNIA'S LARGEST PROVIDER OF
EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICES. UH
MMR S¼ RESPECTFULLY OPPOSED TO A
B 1840 THREE, AS IS CURRENTLY
WRITTEN ON THE EAP SECTION. UH,
PROBLEMS OF MENTAL HEALTH AND
THE INHERENT STRESS ASSOCIATED
WITH EM S¼ ARE NOT IN DISPUTE
TODAY. REGRETTABLY THE EAP
LANGUAGE PROPOSED TODAY DOES NOT
SOLVE THE PROBLEM. THIS COMES
DOWN TO WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF
THE PROGRAM. EAP IS INTENDED TO
SERVE IMMEDIATE AND SHORT TERM
ISSUES AND TO TRIAGE REFERRALS
WHEN APPROPRIATE TO SPECIALIZED,
LONG TERM CARE. OUR DATA AROUND
CURRENT UTILIZATION OF EAP IS
BELOW THREE PERCENT. OF THE 3%
OF EMPLOYEES THAT USE THE A P
SERVICES. THE AVERAGE
UTILIZATION IS 4.5 VISITS WITH
JUST 10 EMPLOYEES OUT OF 5000
USING THE FULL 10 SESSIONS. THE
LOW VISIT UTILIZATION
DEMONSTRATES THAT EMPLOYEES ARE
BEING REFERRED TO LONG TERM
TREATMENT BEFORE MAXING OUT ON
THEIR EAP SESSIONS, P, Tð, S¼,
Dð AND OTHER SERIOUS MENTAL
HEALTH ISSUES DO NOT SIMPLY GO
AWAY AFTER 20 VISITS, THEY CAN
REQUIRE YEARS OF LONG TERM
MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT,
CORRECTLY POINTED OUT BY THE
AUTHOR. THIS LONG TERM COVERAGE
IS BEING PROVIDED UNDER EXISTING
HEALTH INSURANCE, AS IS REQUIRED
UNDER PROPOSITION 11. AM R DID
RESEARCH, UH, REGARDING, UH,
DIRECTLY PAYING FOR UP TO 40
VISITS PER YEAR WITH LONG TERM
MENTAL HEALTH PROVIDER BUT THAT
WOULD ACTUALLY IDENTIFY THE
COMPANY AS AN INSURER. THEREFORE
THEY SETTLED ON MENTAL HEALTH
COVERAGE, EDUCATION, INCREASED
EAP ACCESS. EVEN PUBLIC. EM S¼
EMPLOYEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO
HAVE THAT LEVEL OF COVERAGE. THE
COST OF INCREASED E A IS NOT OUR
CONCERN. INSTEAD WE TAKE ISSUE
WITH SPENDING MORE AND GETTING
LITTLE IN RETURN THAT ADDRESSES
THE ACTUAL PROBLEM. WHAT WE NEED
IS FOR HEALTH INSURERS TO PAY
REASONABLE REIMBURSEMENT RATES
TO MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS
TO ENSURE LONG TERM ACCESS. WHAT
WE NEED IS MORE MENTAL HEALTH
PROFESSIONALS THAT SPECIALIZE IN
EM S¼ ISSUES. AS THE ACTUAL NAME
PROPONENT OF PROP 11 IN 2018. I
CAN PERSONALLY SHARE THAT THE
CHANGES LAID OUT IN THE BILL
WERE NOT DISCUSSED REQUESTED OR
EVEN NEEDED BY OUR ASK ME
WORKFORCE TO BE CLEAR. P Tð S¼
Dð ALREADY IS COVERED UNDER THE
DETAILS OF PROPOSITION 11. AND
DESPITE THE CLAIM BY THE AUTHOR,
OUR EMPLOYEES ARE NOT REQUIRED
ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE
PROPOSITION TO HAVE HEALTH
INSURANCE THAT PROVIDES COVERAGE
FOR PSYCHOTHERAPY CARE IN CLOSE
AGAIN. AM RS OPPOSITION IS NOT
ABOUT ISSUE, BUT SIMPLY THAT IF
AN INCREASED BENEFIT IS GOING TO
BE FUNDED BY THE EMPLOYER, IT
SHOULD ACTUALLY HELP ADDRESS THE
PROBLEM IN OUR RESPECTFULLY
REQUEST A NÓ VOTE AT THIS TIME
AND WELCOMES ANY DIALOGUE FROM
THE AUTHOR OR THIS COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
UM DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? PLEASE
JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND
POSITION ON THE BILL. MADAM
CHAIR DOMINIC TAMARI HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE AMBULANCE
PROVIDERS MEDICAL ALLIANCE. WE
ENDORSE THE WORDS THAT MR
HENSHALL JUST SAID, AND WE ARE
ALSO OPPOSED. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU.
ARE THERE. IS THAT OK? NÓ MORE.
I DON'T SEE ANY MORE WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION. UH, ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS FROM OUR MEMBERS?
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK
YOU TO THE COLLEAGUE FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND I
UNDERSTAND, UM THE OPPOSITION'S
CONCERN. I DO BUT I ALSO
UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS
NECESSARY. UM MY COLLEAGUE WHO
WAS IN THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS, UM MENTAL
HEALTH IS SOMETHING WE'VE TALKED
A LOT ABOUT IN THIS BUILDING. UM
IN THE LAST FEW YEARS, IT'S
SOMETHING WE'RE SHINING A LIGHT
ON IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO
ADDRESS. UM THERE WAS A MAN THAT
I SERVED WITH WHO FEW YEARS
OLDER THAN I AM, DRANK HIMSELF
TO DEATH. UM DIDN'T HAVE ANYBODY
TO TALK TO, UH, WHEN I WAS A
FIREFIGHTER. I PERSONALLY
HOSTED. MORE THAN ONCE ENGINE
COMPANIES AT MY HOUSE. WITH A
CHAPLAIN COMING IN. BECAUSE GUYS
JUST NEEDED TO TALK, RIGHT? AND
I'M NOT SAYING THAT THE
FIREFIGHTERS ARE ALWAYS, UM, THE
SMARTEST AND THE BRIGHTEST ON
THESE ISSUES, RIGHT? WE'RE
USUALLY JUST TOUGH AND JUST WE
WANNA DEAL WITH IT, AND WE
HAVEN'T DONE A GREAT JOB OF
LETTING THEM KNOW WHAT RESOURCES
ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM AND REALLY
ENCOURAGING TO DO THAT. SO I
APPRECIATE THIS BILL. I ALSO
THANK THOUGH, FROM AN AGENCY
PERSPECTIVE FROM AN INDUSTRY
PERSPECTIVE, WE NEED TO DO A
BETTER JOB OF REALLY MAKING SURE
OUR MEN AND WOMEN, UM,
UNDERSTAND THAT THESE RESOURCES
ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM, AND QUITE
FRANKLY, THEY NEED TO GO BECAUSE
CITY OF MODESTO. I DON'T KNOW IF
I HAVE THE NUMBERS EXACTLY
RIGHT, BUT THEY'RE RUNNING ABOUT
FIVE TIMES AS MANY CALLS WITH
1972 STAFFING LEVELS RIGHT THAT
TAKES A TOLL ON PEOPLE. AND YOU
CAN'T EXPECT THEM TO GO TO WORK
EVERY DAY AND NOT BREAK AT SOME
POINT. SO I APPRECIATE THIS BILL
. BUT I ALSO WANNA AND I
ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTING IT TODAY,
BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND THE
CONCERNS THE OPPOSITION, UM
BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT DONE A GOOD
JOB OF UTILIZING THE RESOURCES
THAT ARE ALREADY OUT THERE. UM,
AND I THINK WE NEED TO PUT SOME
EMPHASIS ON THAT AS WELL. THANK
YOU FOR THANK YOU. SEEING NÓ
OTHER QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS.
THANK YOU FOR THAT, UM, YOU MAKE
CLOTHES. I THINK WITH THAT MADAM
CHAIR AND I WANT TO THANK UH MY
COLLEAGUE. UH, FOR THOSE REMARKS
, OBVIOUSLY, IT'S SOMETHING DEAR
TO ME AS WELL HAS BEEN IN THE
FIELD FOR OVER 30 YEARS AND THE
MORE SERVICES WE GIVE TO OUR
EMPLOYEES, THE BETTER,
ESPECIALLY DURING THESE TIMES
OF, UH DIFFICULTY IN CHALLENGING
AS YOU RELATED TO THAT, UM MADAM
CHAIR. QUESTION. WE ASKED WHEN I
VOTE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A FIRST
IN A SECOND. SECRETARY. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS DUE
PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS. ORTEGA
ORTEGA. I FLORA FLORA I ALANIS
ALANIS I WENDY CARRILLO. WENDY
CARO, I LE LE I WARDS. I THAT
BILL IS OUT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU.
WHILE WE WAIT ON ANOTHER AUTHOR,
UM I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOTION
ON THE CONSENT FILE. YOU HAVE A
1ST AND 2ND AND SECRETARY PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. MOTION ON A B
1832 AND A B 1888 IS DUE PASS
CONSENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY MOTION
ON A B 1890 IS DUE PAST CONSENT
TO APPROPRIATIONS. ORTEGA AYE,
ORTEGA I FLORA FLORA I ALICE
ALANIS, I WENDY CREOLE, WENDY.
CREO I LEAVE LEE. I WARDS.
CONSENT CALENDAR IS OUT. ALL
RIGHT, SINCE, UH, OUR OTHER
PRESENTERS ARE NOT HERE BY I AM.
I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND PRESENT
MY BILL. UH, SOME MEMBER FLORA,
PLEASE. HERE IN THE MEETING.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, YOU'LL
BE PRESENTING A èC 14.
THANK YOU. AND NEITHER THE
GOVERNOR NOR THE LEGISLATURE
HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENSURE
BASIC LABOR STANDARDS APPLY TO
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DUE
TO 100 AND 50 YEAR OLD, OUTDATED
PROVISION OF THE STATE
CONSTITUTION. ARTICLE NINE,
SECTION NINE OF THE STATE
CONSTITUTION WAS ADOPTED NEARLY
150 YEARS AGO BEFORE BASIC LABOR
STANDARDS WERE IN PLACE. AS A
RESULT, YOU SEE, HAS REPEATEDLY
PREVAILED IN COURT AND EXCLUDING
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
CALIFORNIANS WHO WORK WHO WORK
FOR U èC FROM BASIC STATE LABOR
STANDARDS THAT APPLY TO ALL
OTHER CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEES. IN
2021. YOU SEE PREVAILED IN COURT
IN THEIR ASSERTION THAT THEY ARE
EXEMPT FROM THE MINIMUM WAGE.
AND THE SAME YEAR PREVAILED IN
COURT ON BEING EXEMPT FROM THE
EQUAL PAY ACT. BASIC STATE LABOR
STANDARDS, SUCH AS EQUAL PAY FOR
WOMEN. THE MINIMUM WAGE.
OVERTIME PAY MEAL AND REST
BREAKS SICK LEAVE PREVAILING
WAGES AND RESTRICTIONS ON
OUTSOURCING OF JOBS SHOULD COVER
ALL CALIFORNIANS. A CæA 14
PROVIDES CALIFORNIA VOTERS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO AMEND ARTICLE
NINE, SECTION NINE OF THE STATE
CONSTITUTION TO ENSURE BASIC
LABOR STANDARDS APPLY TO JUST AS
THEY APPLY TO OTHER EMPLOYERS IN
THE STATE. I AM JOINING THIS
EFFORT TO MOVE A CæA 14 BECAUSE
CALIFORNIA VOTERS DESERVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE ON PARITY
AND CONSISTENCY. I WANT TO
CONCLUDE BY REPEATING WHAT A èC
IS NOT NOTHING IN THE A èC AND
PAIRS S¼ ABILITY TO CONTINUE
CONTRACTING OUT FOR SERVICES,
INCLUDING FOR AN EMERGENCY OF
ANY KIND. THE A èC DOES NOT
IMPACT ACADEMIC FREEDOM. OR THE
SCOPE IS BASIC LABOR STANDARDS.
THAT'S WHAT THE SCOPE OF THE
BILL OF ACA IS. THE ACA DOESN'T
ADD RIGHTS. FOR WORKERS THAT
DON'T ALREADY EXIST IN THE CODE
FOR ALL OTHER WORKERS IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. I HAVE BOTH
COS SPONSORS HERE TO TESTIFY AND
SUPPORT MICHAEL VÀ, PRESIDENT OF
ASK ME, LOCAL 3299 AND SARAH FLO
WITH THE CALIFORNIA FEDERATION
OF LABOR. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES,
ALL RIGHT? GOOD AFTERNOON. UH,
MICHAEL VÀ WOULD ASK ME 3299
REPRESENTS SERVICE WORKERS AT
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND
IN SUPPORT OF A èC A 14. OR
NINE SECTION NINE OF THE STATE
CONSTITUTION WAS ADOPTED NEARLY
100 AND 50 YEARS AGO BEFORE A
BASIC LABOR STANDARDS WERE IN
PLACE IT EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN.
MINIMUM WAGE, OVERTIME, PAY MEAL
AND REST BREAKS, SICK LEAVE AND
PREVAILING WAGE AND RESTRICTION
ON OUTSOURCING OF JOBS. THIS
OUTDATED PROVISION OF THE STATE
CONSTITUTION HAS ALLOWED TO
REPEATEDLY PREVAIL IN COURT AND
KEEP 250,000 CALIFORNIANS
EXCLUDED FROM BASIC STANDARD
LABOR STANDARDS. A èC HÌ SIX. I
MEAN, SORRY, A èC A 14 IS ABOUT
CONSISTENCY AND PARITY. NÓ OTHER
WORKERS IN CALIFORNIA ARE FORCED
TO BARGAIN FOR BASIC LABOR
STANDARDS. NÓ OTHER EMPLOYEE,
BIG OR SMALL, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE
IS GRANTED WHOLESALE IMMUNITY
FOR THOSE BASIC STANDARDS.
CALIFORNIA VOTERS HAVE KEPT OUR
STATE'S CONSTITUTION AS A LIVE
DOCUMENT. WE HAVE A MINUTE AT
OVER 500 TIMES. WE ARE GRATEFUL
FOR THE ASSEMBLY LEADERSHIP FROM
BOTH PARTIES AND LOOK FORWARD TO
THE ONGOING SUPPORT. AGAIN. WE
ASK FOR YOUR VOTE TO GIVE
CALIFORNIA VOTERS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE THE
PROVISION OF THESE STATE
CONSTITUTION WITHOUT MAKING ANY
CHANGE IN PROTECTING ACADEMIC
FREEDOM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. NEXT WITNESS, PLEASE.
MR CHAIR MEMBER SARAH FOX,
CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION. I
DON'T HAVE MUCH TO ADD, UH TO
THE MY PREDECESSORS, BUT THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IS ONE
OF THE BEST UNIVERSITY SYSTEMS
IN THE COUNTRY. AND YET THEY
WANT TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE BASIC
LABOR STANDARDS THAT COVER EVERY
OTHER WORKER IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND THE AUTHOR WENT
THROUGH THESE MINIMUM WAGE,
OVERTIME, HEALTH AND SAFETY
THINGS THAT OTHER WORKERS IN THE
STATE PROTECTIONS, MINIMUM
PROTECTIONS THAT THEY ENJOY. UM
AND SO WE JUST ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL TO LET THE
VOTERS DECIDE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE IN
SUPPORT OF A èC 14? NAME AN
ORGANIZATION, PLEASE. AND
MEMBERS WITH. ASK ME CALIFORNIA
HERE AND VERY STRONG SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANYONE ELSE IN SUPPORT? JOHN
CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION
AND ST SUPPORT. THANK YOU SO
MUCH, ALL RIGHT. ANYONE IN
OPPOSITION TO A èC 14. COME ON
UP, AND YOU'LL HAVE TWO
WITNESSES FOR TWO MINUTES
APIECE. HØI. READY. THANK YOU.
CHAIR ORTEGA AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS CATHERINE
NEWMAN. I'M THE PROVOST AND
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF
ACADEMIC AFFAIRS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND ON
BEHALF OF MICHAEL DRAKE. I'M
HERE IN OPPOSITION TO A èC 14.
HERE'S THE MAIN MESSAGE. A CæA
14 IS UNNECESSARY AND IF IT IS
PASSED, IT WILL SIGNIFICANTLY
IMPEDE THE UNIVERSITY'S ABILITY
TO FUNCTION AS AN EDUCATIONAL
RESEARCH AND HEALTH CARE
INSTITUTION. WITH RARE
EXCEPTIONS, YOU SEE ALREADY
MEATS AND OFTEN EXCEEDS THE
LABOR STANDARDS REQUIRED BY
STATE LAW, INCLUDING THOSE
MENTIONED IN THE BILL. OUR
WORKERS ARE PROTECTED BY STATE
STATUTES BY COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENTS AND UC'S
OWN EXTENSIVE EMPLOYEE POLICIES.
YOU SEE STRIVES TO BE AN
EXEMPLARY EMPLOYER AND A
RELIABLE PARTNER WITH OUR VALUED
LABOR UNIONS AND OUR EMPLOYEES,
AND THAT'S NOT JUST TALK. WHEN
MANY FIRMS CUT WORKERS DURING
THE PANDEMIC PROTECTED THOUSANDS
OF EMPLOYEES. WE ARE ESPECIALLY
GRATEFUL FOR THE TREMENDOUS
SACRIFICES MADE BY OUR HEALTH
CARE PROFESSIONALS AND SUPPORT
STAFF DURING THAT TIME AND
THEREAFTER. THE ISSUES ACA 1400
SEEKS TO RESOLVE ARE ADDRESSED
AT THE BARGAINING TABLE AND EVEN
THROUGH BILLS, AND THAT'S WHERE
THE DISCUSSION SHOULD REMAIN IN
OUR VIEW. WE DO NOT NEED THE
BALLOT BOX TO BE TRUE TO OUR
MISSION AND OUR RESPONSIBILITIES
. WE ARE ALREADY ATTENDING TO
BOTH, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU SEE,
EMPLOYEES ARE COVERED BY
LEGISLATION SPECIFYING LABOR
PROTECTIONS, INCLUDING TIMELY
PAYMENT OF WAGES, CONTRACTING
FOR SERVICES, MEAL AND REST
BREAKS. THESE ARE ALL ITEMS
MENTIONED IN A èC 14, AND NONE
OF THEM REQUIRE A CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT. WHAT IS THE HARM OF
ADDING A èC 14? PLENTY. IT
WOULD UNDERMINE OUR ENTIRE
ENTERPRISE. THAT'S BECAUSE A èC
A 14 WOULD TREAT THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA DIFFERENTLY FROM
EVERY OTHER HIGHER EDUCATION
ENTITY IN THE STATE, BOTH PUBLIC
AND PRIVATE. WE WOULD BE HELD A
ONE SET OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
LAWS, WHILE OTHER CALIFORNIA
UNIVERSITIES RECEIVE
ACCOMMODATIONS THAT ALLOW THEM
TO PURSUE THEIR NECESSARY
FUNCTIONS. IN FACT, THE STATE
EXPRESSLY EXCLUDES THE èC S¼ U
SYSTEM FROM MANY OF THE SAME
REQUIREMENTS THAT A èC 14 WOULD
IMPOSE. ASK YOU TO FINISH UP
YOUR THOUGHT. THANK YOU. YOU CAN
FINISH YOUR THOUGHT. OK, UM
FINALLY, A CæA. 14 DOES IN FACT
RISK THE ACADEMIC AUTONOMY OF
THE UNIVERSITY IF YOU WANT IT TO
REMAIN THE EXCELLENT UNIVERSITY
YOU'VE HEARD ABOUT YOU WILL VOTE
NÓ ON E èC 14 THANK YOU SO
MUCH. NEXT WITNESS, PLEASE.
THANKS. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR.
ORTEGA CHAIR FLORA, UH AND OTHER
MEMBERS. I'M SURESH AND SAC. I'M
THE PRESIDENT. èC E Ó OF U èC
S¼ F HEALTH, ONE OF THE SIX
ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTERS IN THE U
èC SYSTEM. AND THE OTHER
MEDICAL CENTERS TREAT PATIENTS
FROM EVERY CORNER OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THEIR COMPLEX HEALTH CARE
NEEDS. THEY ARRIVE DAILY WEEKLY
AND MONTHLY TO OUR MEDICAL
CENTERS. A èC A 14 WOULD
COMPROMISE OUR ABILITY TO CARE
FOR THOSE PATIENTS. THIS
INCLUDES PATIENTS THAT, UH, COME
FROM, UH, AFFILIATE HOSPITALS OF
ALL OF OUR MEDICAL CENTERS IN
EVERY COMMUNITY, INCLUDING YOUR
CONSTITUENTS. U èC S¼ F HEALTH
HAS 17,000 EMPLOYEES WHO ENABLE
WORLD CLASS CARE TO OCCUR. WE
PAY COMPETITIVE WAGES AND OFFER
ROBUST BENEFITS TO RECRUIT AND
RETAIN OUR HEALTH CARE WORKERS.
WE ADHERE TO THE REGION'S POLICY
AND ONLY CONTRACT OUT WHEN
NECESSARY. HOWEVER SOMETIMES WE
NEED WE MUST, UH, CONTRACT OUT
IN SITUATIONS OF EMERGENCIES
CAUSED BY BOTH, UH,
UNDERSTAFFING GIVEN REALLY HIGH
PATIENT LOADS OR CRITICAL
EQUIPMENT NEEDS. FOR EXAMPLE, U
èC S¼ F JUST IN THE LAST YEAR
HAS, UH IN OUR CHILDREN'S
HOSPITAL EXPERIENCED A HUGE
SURGE IN PATIENTS THAT COULD NOT
HAVE BEEN FORESEEN BECAUSE OF
COVID AND R S¼ VÆ. WE HAD STAFF
UP TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE
PATIENTS. A èC A 14 WOULD
REQUIRE U, S¼ F AND OTHER U èC
HEALTH SYSTEMS TO FOLLOW ONEROUS
STATE CONTRACTING RULES AND
PROCESSES, WHICH ARE NOT
DESIGNED FOR OPERATING HOSPITALS
. OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
HOSPITALS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA DON'T HAVE THOSE
RESTRICTIONS WHEN WE HAVE BROKEN
EQUIPMENT. WHEN WE HAVE PATIENT
SURGES, WE NEED ADDITIONAL STAFF
. OTHERWISE THE STAFF THAT ARE
THERE ON SITE ARE NOT SUPPORTED.
THEY'RE UNABLE TO MEET THEIR
MISSION, SO IT'S CRITICAL. THAT
JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER HOSPITAL
IN CALIFORNIA, WE HAVE THE
ABILITY TO MOVE NIMBLY TO PUT
OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND MEET OUR
MISSION. A èC 14 WILL HARM
PATIENT CARE AT UCSF AND OTHER U
èC MEDICAL CENTERS IF WE CAN'T
STAFF OUR BEDS AND MAINTAIN
CRITICAL EQUIPMENT, WE WILL BE
FORCED TO DELAY CARE. THIS WILL
HARM PATIENTS. FOR THESE
REASONS. I URGE YOU TO VOTE NÓ
ON A èC 14. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
ANYONE ELSE IN OPPOSITION TO A
èC A 14. NAME AN ORGANIZATION,
PLEASE. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
MEMBER COMMITTEE. OH, SORRY
ABOUT THAT. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, UH,
RON AND B TO GO HERE WITH, UH,
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION IN
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION TO A èC
14. THANK YOU. UH, GOOD
AFTERNOON, ASHLEY HOFFMAN ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE AND OPPOSITION. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS
JANET LOPEZ, REPRESENTING U èC,
L A AND U èC MERCED IN
OPPOSITION. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
AND MEMBERS AMI ALDEN,
REPRESENTING UCSF CHANCELLOR SAM
HAGO AND IRVINE IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR MR. CHAIR
CHRIS MALLEY ON BEHALF OF THE
LOS ANGELES AREA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE AND RESPECTFUL
OPPOSITION. GOOD AFTERNOON,
LORRAINE COVEO ON BEHALF OF UC
DAVIS AND ITS CHANCELLOR AND U
èC SANTA CRUZ IN OPPOSITION.
HØI GOOD AFTERNOON. MIGUEL
MARTINEZ WITH UH U èC, BERKELEY
CHANCELLOR CAROL CRIST AND èC,
UH SANTA BARBARA CHANCELLOR
HENRY YANG IN OPPOSITION OF A
èC 14. GOOD AFTERNOON, ANGELA
GILLIARD WITH UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA HEALTH SYSTEM, REPS.
UM IN OPPOSITION, REPRESENTING
THE OTHER U èC HEALTH SYSTEMS.
UM UH U, èC DAVIS, UH U èC,
IRVINE, U èC SAN DIEGO AND U
èC L A, UM IN OPPOSITION
RESPECTFULLY. GOOD AFTERNOON,
JACK GIANNIS ASKED RO REGISTER
OPPOSITION I BEHALF OF THE
ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR
CHAIR MEMBERS, UH, JEAN HURST
HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF PUBLIC
HOSPITALS AND HEALTH SYSTEMS,
ALSO IN OPPOSITION. HØI CAITLIN
SHELL ON BEHALF OF U, èC AND
DIEGO U, èC, SAN DIEGO HEALTH
AND U èC RIVERSIDE. WE OPPOSE
MAX PERRY ON BEHALF OF THE SAN
DIEGO REGIONAL CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE. APOLOGIES OUR LETTER
DIDN'T MAKE IT IN TIME FOR THE
DEADLINE, BUT ALSO OPPOSED.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE
IN OPPOSITION SEEN NONE. BRING
IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. ANY
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? MR
LEE. UH, I WANNA THANK OUR CHAIR
LIZARD ASSEMBLY TO TAKE UP FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND
INCONSISTENT WITH MY SUPPORT FOR
ALL OUR MEASURES TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE U èC S¼ ARE FOLLOWING
OUR STATE LABOR REGULATIONS,
LABOR LAWS. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK
TO BE A CO AUTHOR AT IT IF
POSSIBLE, AND I AM HAPPY TO
SUPPORT THE BILL AND I'LL MOVE
THE BILL AS WELL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR WARD.
THANK YOU. I ALSO WANNA THANK
YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD.
UM I DO THINK, UH, FIRST OF ALL,
TO OUR EMPLOYEES OF THE U èC,
UM, THAT, UH, WE APPRECIATE THE
WORK THAT THEY DO, DAY IN DAY
OUT TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE
CRITICAL SERVICES AT OUR
HOSPITALS AND AT THESE
UNIVERSITY FACILITIES, UM, IT'S
HARD WORK. UH, THEY'RE UNDERPAID
AND WE ALL DO OUR PART TO TRY TO
MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MEETING THE
MOMENT TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT
THEM. UM BUT OF COURSE, WE AS A
LEGISLATURE ARE ONLY ABLE TO DO
THAT, UH, WITH OUR WITH OTHER
HIGHER EDUCATION SEGMENTS. UM,
UH, THERE'S I THINK IMPORTANT
REASON WHY, UH HE HAS BEEN
CARVED OUT AND IS, UH, PROTECTED
. UH, SEPARATELY UNDER THE
CONSTITUTION, WHICH IS WHY WE
ARE PUTTING FORWARD A QUESTION
TO THE VOTERS TO BE ABLE TO LET
THEM DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THE
SAME LABOR STANDARDS SHOULD
APPLY. UM YOU KNOW, IN IN THE
COMMENT THAT YOU KNOW, WE'RE YOU
KNOW, TREATING DIFFERENT
SEGMENTS DIFFERENTLY, OR THERE'S
GONNA BE ONE SET OF THE LABOR
LAWS VERSUS OTHER SYSTEMS. I
THINK AGAIN BECAUSE WE CAN WE
HAVE THE POWER AND WE ARE. WE
ARE VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT. UH UH
, LIFTING UP MANY OF THOSE
STANDARDS FOR OTHER WORKERS, BUT
WE DON'T HAVE THAT POWER. WE CAN
NEVER HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE
ABLE TO FOR THAT, UH, TO SOME
EMPLOYEES HERE THAT, UH, ARE
EMPLOYED BY THE U èC. UH,
BECAUSE OF THIS, UM, SORT OF
BIFURCATION OF AUTHORITY. UM SO
FOR THAT REASON, I THINK THAT
YOU KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT JUST ON
AN EQUITY SITE THAT THAT WE ARE
HAVING SOME PARITY, MAYBE
BETWEEN THE SYSTEMS THAT THAT'S
HOW I VIEW IT. AND I KNOW THIS
IS DIFFERENT THAN UM, THE, UH,
MEASURE THAT THIS COMMITTEE, UH,
HEARD LAST YEAR, WHICH WE ALSO
SUPPORTED AND MOVED FORWARD OUT
OF THE ASSEMBLY. UM COMING INTO
THE SENATE. THEY TOOK A LOT OF
AMENDMENTS. AND I THINK WHAT'S
COMING BACK HERE TODAY IS NOW.
THAN WHAT WE SAW IN THE LABOR
COMMITTEE LAST YEAR. UM MADAM
AUTHOR, COULD YOU POSSIBLY, UH,
MAYBE ELUCIDATE WHERE THINGS ARE
? AS FAR AS A èC 14 THAT YOU
SEE AS UH, IMPROVEMENTS THAT
WERE REALLY NECESSARY TO BE ABLE
TO, UH, BRING THOSE IN ON
INTRODUCTION OR HOW MUCH OF
THOSE WERE YOU KNOW, EITHER
EITHER CONCESSIONS OR, UM OR OR
CHANGES AT THE SENATE? UH HAD,
UM, UH INDUCED THAT YOU KNOW, WE
NEED TO HAVE SOME CLOSER STUDY
ON I'M GONNA ASK. UH OH, SHE'S
HERE. LIZ PERLMAN TO, UH, ANSWER
THAT QUESTION FROM MÀ ME 3299.
HØI UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, SO THE
SENATE ACTUALLY REJECTED A èC,
A SIX AND A èC 14 IS THE EXACT
SAME AS A èC HÌ. IT WAS AMENDED
WHEN IT GOT TO THE SENATE,
RIGHT? YES AND SO AND THIS
REFLECTS THOSE AMENDMENTS. AND
THIS REFLECTS THOSE AMENDMENTS.
OK SO THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE DID
NOT CONSIDER THE LANGUAGE, THE
IMPROVEMENTS OR OTHERWISE THAT
THE CHANGES THAT THAT THE
ASSEMBLY DID NOT CONSIDER WHAT
ARE WHAT ARE THOSE NOW, UH,
INCORPORATING INTO THIS MEASURE?
WHAT WAS INCORPORATED INTO THE
SENATE. IT WAS INCORPORATED INTO
THIS MEASURE. WHICH IS UM, SO,
UH, THEY WERE JUST SOME
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. I THINK I
WOULD JUST HAVE TO, UM, BUT IT
THERE WASN'T ANYTHING
SUBSTANTIVE TO, UM THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A èC A SIX
AND A èC A 14. BUT THERE
WEREN'T THERE WERE OTHER
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS THAT
WEREN'T INCORPORATED. WOULD
ANYBODY FROM OPPOSITION LIKE TO
SPEAK TO KIND OF THE EVOLUTION
OF THIS BILL? ON BEHALF OF THE
CHAIR, AND I WILL TURN YOUR MIC
ON, SIR. YEAH ACTUALLY, JUST TO
OH, SORRY. CAN I PROVIDE CLARITY
? THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT THAT
WAS TO PROVIDE CLARITY THAT THIS
ONLY APPLIED TO PUBLIC SECTOR
CODES AND THAT WAS THE AMENDMENT
THAT WAS TAKEN. OK. THANK YOU,
MR WARD. WOULD YOU LIKE TO HEAR
FROM THE OPPOSITION? OF COURSE.
I WAS JUST GONNA REITERATE THE
SAME THING AS THIS BILL PASSED
OUT OF ASSEMBLY LABOR COMMITTEE
LAST YEAR. THE REQUIREMENTS THAT
WOULD APPLY TO THE UNIVERSITY
WOULD MAKE IT APPLICABLE TO THE
SAME LABOR CODE SECTIONS THAT
APPLY TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE
EMPLOYEES. ON JUNE 20TH IN THE
ASSEMBLY, THE BEN MILLER WAS
AMENDED TO APPLY TO PUBLIC
SECTOR OF STATE EMPLOYEES. OK
THANK YOU. I THINK THAT AGAIN,
YOU KNOW VERY MUCH PRINCIPALLY
SUPPORT. WHAT? UM, OUR CHAIR AND
THE AUTHOR IS TRYING TO DO HERE
TO PUT A QUESTION BEFORE THE
VOTERS. SO THERE IS PARITY FOR
ALL EMPLOYEES, UH, LIKE
EMPLOYEES, UH, IN CALIFORNIA,
AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS GONNA
INVOKE. I THINK A LOT OF
IMPORTANT CONVERSATION AT THE
SUBSEQUENT STEPS THAT WE HAVE IN
FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW, SO I'LL
LOOK FORWARD TO MONITORING THIS
AS IT GOES FORWARD, BUT
APPRECIATE IT WILL BE SUPPORTING
TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I
ALSO WANNA ADD JUST IN CLOSING.
IF THAT'S OK TO THE CHAIR, OR
THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY
QUÊ. I MEAN, YOU'RE THE CHAIR.
SO IF YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU
WANT, UM BUT, UH, ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS FROM THE DIASA? I JUST
NEED SOME CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE
, UH, IN MY NOTES WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT, UH, CHANGES IN
PATIENT COUNTS. UH SO I'M I'M
ASSUMING LIKE FLU SEASONS IN
FLUX AND LIKE MAYBE WITH
WILDFIRES AND STUFF LIKE THAT
MAYBE THE HOSPITALS ARE
INUNDATED WITH WITH PATIENTS. UM
COULD YOU HELP ME BETTER
UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT? WHAT? THE
CONCERNS ARE WITH THAT? YES UM,
UNDER THIS PROPOSED UNDER THIS
PROPOSAL, WE'D HAVE A PRETTY
ONEROUS PROCESS TO BE ABLE TO
ACCESS STAFF SPECIALIZED STAFF
IN IN A PINCH QUICKLY. YOU'D
HAVE TO GO THROUGH A REVIEW
PROCESS FOR THAT CONTRACT TO BE
DONE. WHEREAS TODAY THAT
DECISION IS MADE LOCALLY AT U
èC S¼ F UNDERSTANDING WHAT'S IN
OUR EMERGENCY ROOM AND WE'D BE
ABLE TO MOVE QUICKLY ON THAT.
UH, ACTUALLY I FROM WHAT I
UNDERSTAND THAT OUR STATE
CONTRACTING OUTLAWS DO ALLOW FOR
CONTRACTING OUT IN CASE OF
EMERGENCIES, SO THERE'S NOTHING
IN THE A èC A THAT WE PREVENT
THE U èC FROM BEING ABLE TO
TAKE EMERGENCY ACTION. I WOULD
SAY THAT THE CLARIFICATION THAT
WE NEED TO MAKE IS THAT THERE'S
A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EMERGENCY
AND URGENCY. AND WHAT I WOULD
SAY IS THAT IN HEALTHCARE
SIGNIFICANT URGENCY IN LONG WAIT
TIMES IN AN EMERGENCY ROOM.
SIGNIFICANT URGENCY IF WE HAVE
FOUR MRI S¼ IN THE EMERGENCY
ROOM THAT GO DOWN TO TWO THE
DEFINITION OF EMERGENCY VERSUS
URGENCY IS CRITICAL TO THIS
DISCUSSION. AND WHAT I WOULD
ARGUE IS THAT WE'RE LOSING A LOT
OF FLEXIBILITY AND LATITUDE IN
THAT BECAUSE WHEN WE ARE
HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS WHO ARE
REALLY PUTTING OUR PATIENTS
FORWARD. WE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO
MAKE THAT DECISION. AND THAT'S
WHERE I THINK THIS IS REALLY,
UH, NEBULOUS. UM IT WOULD BE
IT'S HARD TO BE PRESCRIPTIVE IN
THAT REVIEW PROCESS WOULD BE
REALLY DIFFICULT FOR US TO
NAVIGATE. SO WHO RIGHT NOW MAKES
THE DEFINITION OF THE EMERGENCY
OR THE URGENCY. CURRENTLY
THERE'S FIVE STATE PUBLIC
HOSPITALS THAT LIVE UNDER THIS
CURRENT STATE CONTRACT AND GOES
AND THOSE HOSPITALS MAKE THOSE
DETERMINATION. UM OBVIOUSLY, IN
THE CASE OF EMERGENCY, UM AND
THEY THEY LIVE WITHIN THE
CURRENT CODES. AND THESE FIVE
HAVE THE FIVE STATE PUBLIC
HOUSES AND THEY MAKE THAT
DETERMINATION ON THE ON ON THE
SPOT. ABSOLUTELY IF THERE'S AN
EMERGENCY AND AN URGENCY,
ABSOLUTELY. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT
YOU KNOW TO BE CLEAR. THOSE FIVE
STATE HOSPITALS DON'T RESEMBLE
èC S¼ F MEDICAL CENTER IN ANY
WAY, SHAPE OR FORM IN TERMS OF
THE COMPLEXITY OF PATIENTS THAT
WE SEE BOTH IN TRANSFER AND
THROUGH OUR EMERGENCY ROOM, SO I
WOULD SAY THAT WHEN YOU TAKE A
LOOK AT THE OBJECTIVE METRIC OF
CASE MIX INDEX, WHICH SHOWS THE
ACUITY OF THE PATIENTS THAT ARE
COMING THROUGH THE U èC SYSTEM
UNIQUELY HAS THE HIGHEST CASE
MIX INDEX IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU. I THINK
YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING TOO.
NÓ JUST THAT THE LEGISLATURE
WILL HAVE THE POWER TO ADDRESS
ANY OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE U
èC HAS GOING FORWARD, UM, JUST
AS THEY HAVE WITH OTHER STATE
CONTRACTING CODES WITH OTHER
INSTITUTIONS, OK, AND I JUST ONE
OTHER CONCERN THAT I'VE, UH MY
COLLEAGUE BROUGHT UP AS FAR AS
WAGES GO, UH, FAIR AND, UH,
COMPENSATION MINIMUM WAGE. IS
THERE SOMETHING NOT BEING DONE?
I CORRECT ME. FOR NOT KNOWING
EVERYTHING ON THIS, BUT, UH, GO
AHEAD. THE UNIVERSITY HAS
PREVAILED IN COURT. UM WHEN, UH,
MINIMUM WAGE CASES HAVE BEEN
BROUGHT AGAINST THE UNIVERSITY,
AND THEY'VE CLAIMED IMMUNITY FOR
MINIMUM WAGE LAWS AND THEY
PREVAILED. THE COURTS HAVE SIDED
WITH THEM. OK? SIR. DID YOU HAVE
A YOU HAVE A RESPONSE TO THAT? I
JUST WANNA SAY AGAIN ON BEHALF
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
WE ARE AND HAVE BEEN PAYING
MINIMUM WAGE FOR THE LAST
SEVERAL YEARS. IN FACT, FOR MANY
YEARS PRIOR TO THE STATE'S
DETERMINATION OF THE STATE
MINIMUM WAGE A FEW YEARS AGO,
THE MINIMUM WAGE WAS HIGHER. IT
WAS $15 AN HOUR GOING BACK TO
2017. AS THE STATESMAN WAGE HAS
KICKED IN. WE HAVE BEEN MEETING
THAT WAGE EACH AND EVERY TIME IT
GETS INCREASED. IN FACT, OUR
UNIVERSITY POLICY NOW SPEAKS TO
THE REQUIREMENT THAT WE MATCH
THAT STATEMENT. WAGE SO, UH, IT
MAY BE THE CASE THAT WE HAVE
PREVAILED IN COURT IN THE PAST.
WHEN IT COMES TO WHETHER OR NOT
WE DO PAY MINIMUM WAGE WE DO
ACROSS THE BOARD. THE ISSUE. THE
ISSUE IS ONE OF ENFORCEMENT.
IT'S YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY IF
WORKERS CAN'T PREVAIL IN COURT,
IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THE
UNIVERSITY SAYS THAT THEY INTEND
TO PAY MINIMUM WAGE IF THEY
DON'T HOW DO THEY? HOW DOES THE
WORKER ENFORCE IT? THANK YOU.
I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE CHAIR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS FROM DÍAS ZUBER? SO I
WANT TO THANK THE AUTHOR FOR
BRINGING THIS BILL. I'M STRONGLY
IN SUPPORT OF IT. UM I ALSO
REPRESENT, UH U èC L A AS PART
OF MY DISTRICT. AND UM, I
STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SYSTEM
NEEDS TO BE SUBJECT TO LABOR
LAWS AND THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE
VOLUNTARY. AND YOU KNOW, I THINK
THE QUESTION COMES INTO PLACE
ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD
BE SUBJECT TO THE LAWS THAT ARE
MORE APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLIC
SERVICE EMPLOYEES OR THOSE IN
THE PRIVATE SECTOR. UM, I THINK
THE ONE SET OF ISSUES THAT I'M
HOPING THE AUTHOR WILL CONTINUE
TO FOCUS ON. UM OUR, UM, YOU
KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT. I THINK
THAT THE U èC SYSTEM REMAIN
COMPETITIVE WITH STANFORD AND
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND
OTHERS AND TO THE EXTENT THERE
ARE THINGS THAT ARE MORE
APPROPRIATE, UH, MODELS THAT ARE
IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR LABOR LAWS
THAT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR, UM
I'M HOPING THAT YOU'LL AT LEAST
LOOK AT THOSE. UM I HAVEN'T
GOTTEN INTO THE WEEDS ON THIS.
UH, I DID MEET WITH THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. AND
THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT SOME OF
THE THINGS WERE WOULD MAKE THEM
PUT THEM IN A DIFFERENT POSITION
VIS A VIS STANFORD AND
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AND U,
S¼ èC AND SOME OF THOSE FOLKS,
AND SO, UM MY BOTTOM LINE IS I
SUPPORT THE BILL. I THINK IT'S I
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT, BUT
I'M HOPING THAT AT LEAST ON SOME
OF THESE KINDS OF THINGS THAT
YOU'LL, UH THINK ABOUT WHETHER
OR NOT WE'RE PUTTING THE U èC
SYSTEMS, AND THAT'S NOT SAYING
THAT THEY SHOULD BE EXEMPT. WHAT
IS SAYING IS, ARE THE LABOR
STANDARDS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO
STANFORD OR UNIVERSITY OF
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA? MORE
APPROPRIATE FOR SOME SUBSETS OF
THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE DOING SO
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS FROM THE DÍAS? èC N
N, MADAM CHAIR. WOULD YOU LIKE
TO CLOSE? YES UH, JUST WANNA
REITERATE THE SCOPE OF THE A èC
IS BASIC LABOR STANDARDS. BASIC
LABOR STANDARDS, ESPECIALLY AS
WE JUST CELEBRATED, UH, WOMEN'S
HISTORY MONTH. I WANNA REITERATE
THAT WHEN WE'RE ASKING FOR IS
FOR THE VOTERS TO BE ABLE TO
VOTE AND AFFIRM THAT THEY WANT
EQUAL PAY FOR WOMEN. THE MINIMUM
WAGE OVERTIME PAY. LEAVE
PREVAILING WAGES AT OUR PREMIER
INSTITUTION IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR EYE VOTE. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. WE'RE GONNA NEED A
SECOND. THANK YOU. SECRETARY.
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION
IS BE ADOPTED AND REFERRED TO
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ORTEGA
AY ORTEGA I FLORA FLORA, NOT
VOTING, ALANIS. ALANIS NOT
VOTING. WENDY CARRILLO, WENDY, I
LE LE I WARD WARD EYES A BIRTH
THE EYE. THAT MEASURE IS UP
MEASURES OUT.
ALRIGHT UH, WE HAVE, UH, ITEM
NUMBER SIX, A B 2135 ASSEMBLY
MEMBER XIA, YOU MAY COME UP.
GOOD AFTERNOON. UM THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR COMMITTEE MEMBERS. I
AM VERY HAPPY TO PRESENT ON A B
2135 TO YOU TODAY, WHICH IS A
BILL THAT HELPS THE STATE
ENFORCE ITS LABOR LAWS. WAGE
THEFT AFFECTS TENS OF THOUSANDS
OF WORKERS EVERY YEAR IN NEARLY
EVERY FIELD FOR FAMILIES LIVING
PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK. WAGE THEFT
MEANS THAT BALANCING BUDGETS IS
IMPOSSIBLE. UNFORTUNATELY THOSE
SAME INDIVIDUALS OFTEN DON'T
HAVE THE CAPACITY TO SEEK
JUSTICE WITHOUT ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT. BAD ACTORS ALSO CREATE
DIS A DISADVANTAGE FOR HONEST
CONTRACTORS LIVING UP TO THE
HIGH STANDARDS WE HOLD IN
CALIFORNIA FOR PUBLIC WORKS.
UNFORTUNATELY AS YOU'LL HEAR
FROM GREG AND ANDRES, WHO SPEAK,
UH, AFTER ME, THE CURRENT
COMPLAINT PROCESS FOR PUBLIC
WORKS IS LEAVING WORKERS OUT IN
THE COLD AND THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS IS CREATING IN
SITUATIONS WHERE NOT ONLY ARE
WORKERS COMPLAINTS CLOSED
PREMATURELY, BUT BAD ACTORS CAN
CONTINUE TO OPERATE UNABATED. IT
IS THE STATE'S ROLE TO SURE THAT
ALL CONTRACTORS MEET OUR
STANDARDS AND A B 23 1521 30.
SORRY 2135 0. WE MIXED AROUND
SOME NUMBERS HERE. UM A B 2135
GIVES THE LABOR COMMISSION THE
TIME NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT WE
LIVE UP TO THIS RESPONSIBILITY.
UM AND YOU KNOW THE BILL
BASICALLY DOES THREE SIMPLE
THINGS. IT EXTENDS THE STATUTE
OF LIMITATIONS ON COMPLAINTS
SUBMITTED TO THE LABOR
COMMISSION FROM 18 TO 24 MONTHS.
IT ALLOWS THE LABOR COMMISSIONER
TO CONTINUE ONGOING
INVESTIGATIONS BEYOND THE
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR GOOD
CAUSE. UM, AND IF PEOPLE ARE
WORKING IN EARNEST, AND IT
PROHIBITS AN OPEN INVESTIGATION
FROM BEING CLOSED SOLELY DUE TO
THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, SO I
AM JOINED BY GREG LEWIS, THE
BUSINESS MANAGER FOR PLUMBERS
AND PIPES, FITTERS LOCAL 761 AND
ANDRES POSADA, WHO'S DIRECTOR OF
THE LABOR MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE
COUNCIL, TO ALSO SPEAK ON THIS
BILL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOU
HAVE TWO MINUTES EACH. OK UH,
GOOD AFTERNOON. COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. MY NAME IS GREG LEWIS.
I'M THE BUSINESS MANAGER FOR
PLUMBERS AND PIPEFITTERS. LOCAL
761, REPRESENTING OVER 1000
MEMBERS IN L, A COUNTY I CAME
HERE TODAY TO ASK YOU TO STAND
WITH WORKING FAMILIES AND VOTE
YES, ON A B 2135. THIS BILL IS
ABOUT ENFORCING PREVAILING WAGE
LAWS. MAKING SURE THAT WORKERS
ARE GETTING PAID WHAT THEY
EARNED AND HOLDING BAD
CONTRACTORS ACCOUNTABLE. ONE
EXAMPLE OF HOW THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS HAS IMPACTED WORKERS
. IT IS A PUBLIC PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECT IN MY HOMETOWN OF SANTA
CLARITA. IT WAS A SENIOR CENTER
PREVENTING WAGE VIOLATIONS WERE
FOUND ON SEVERAL CONTRACTORS ON
THIS JOB, INCLUDING NOT
SUBMITTING THE REQUIRED FORMS,
NOT HIRING APPRENTICES.
INCORRECT JOURNEYMEN TO
APPRENTICE RATIOS,
MISCLASSIFYING WORKERS, BUT MOST
IMPORTANT FAILURE TO PAY
PREVAILING WAGES. CASES AGAINST
THESE CONTRACTORS WERE OPENED
WITH THE Dð L S¼ IN 2020. WE'RE
UNDER INVESTIGATION UNTIL THEY
REACH THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
. IN 2020 THREE, THE CASES WERE
SIMPLY CLOSED. SO THE PEOPLE
WORKING ON THAT JOB GETTING
DIRTY DIGGING DITCHES INSTALLING
PIPE FIRE SPRINKLERS, AIR
CONDITIONING, TOILETS AND
EVERYTHING ELSE WERE UN WERE NOT
APPROPRIATELY PAID FOR THE WORK,
AND THE CONTRACTORS JUST GOT
AWAY WITH IT. UNFORTUNATELY THIS
HAPPENS ALL TOO OFTEN AFFECTING
UNION AND NONUNION WORKERS
ALIKE. WITH TODAY'S COST OF
LIVING. THE LAST THING WE CAN
ACCEPT IS WORKERS BEING RIPPED
OFF. THIS IS NOT A VICTIMLESS
CRIME. THESE ARE CALIFORNIANS
STRUGGLING TO KEEP A ROOF OVER
THEIR HEADS. WHEN WORKERS GET
RIPPED OFF, PEOPLE LOSE THEIR
HOMES, THEIR FAMILIES BREAK UP,
AND WE ALL PAY THAT PAY A PRICE
FOR THAT. THIS IS A COMMON SENSE
, BILL THAT'LL GIVE THE Dð L S¼
E MORE TIME TO INVESTIGATE THE
CASES. OPEN CASES WON'T CLOSE
JUST TO A TIME LIMIT AND IT'LL
HELP WORKERS GET THE MONEY THEY
EARNED. THIS WILL ALSO HELP
ENSURE THAT AWARDING AGENCIES
AND TAXPAYERS GET WHAT THEY PAID
FOR AND HOLD THAT CONTRACTORS
ACCOUNTABLE. THAT'S WHY I'M
ASKING YOU TO VOTE. YES, ON A B
2135. THANK YOU. WELL GOOD
AFTERNOON COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS ANDRES POSADA. I'M THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE LABOR
MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE COUNCIL,
OR LM. èC èC. WE ARE A JOINT
LIBERAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
CORPORATION COMMITTEE. UM THAT
MONITORS COMPLIANCE WITH THE
PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENTS
APPLICABLE TO PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECTS I'VE BEEN DOING, UH,
THE LABOR COMPLIANCE WORK FOR
OVER 15 YEARS AND I'VE BEEN IN
CHARGE OF THIS, UH, DEPARTMENT
FOR THE LAST SIX. UM DURING THIS
TIME WE'VE BEEN COOPERATING AND
COORDINATING AND PARTNERING WITH
THE DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS
ENFORCEMENT IN TWO MAIN WAYS,
FIRST ONE, WE'RE SUPPORTING
THEIR OUTREACH EFFORTS BY CO
HOSTING EVENTS THAT ARE FREE AND
UP INTO THE PUBLIC IN ORDER TO
SPREAD KNOWLEDGE, UH, ABOUT THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE REQUIREMENTS
IN THE DUTIES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ALL THE
PARTICIPANTS IN PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECTS NOW THE SECOND WAY IN
WHICH WE HAVE PARTNERED WITH THE
STATE IS SUBMITTING COMPLAINTS
TO THE SEA. THE DIVISION OF
LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT. MY
TEAM CONDUCTS SITE VISITS AND
REQUEST FOR PAYROLL AND THEN WE
CRUNCH THE NUMBERS. WE TRY TO
FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S AN ISSUE,
AND WHEN THERE'S A PROBLEM, WE
FORWARD A COMPLAINT TO THE
STATE. REGRETTABLY THE PROBLEM
THAT THAT COMPLIANCE AGENCIES
LIKE MINE HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING
DURING THE LAST 5 TO 6 YEARS IS
THAT MANY OF THE CASES THAT ARE
FORWARDED TO THE STATE IN THE
FORM OF COMPLAINTS ARE BEING
RETURNED TO US. YOU KNOW AS
HAVING REACHED THE STATUE OF
LIMITATIONS. AT A PERSONAL
LEVEL. I CAN TELL YOU THAT MY
OFFICE SINCE 2021 HAS RECEIVED
APPROXIMATELY 26 ALMOST 27% OF
ITS CASES HAS REACHED OUT THE
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. AND THIS
IS PRETTY BAD NEWS FOR THE
WORKERS WHOSE LAST LINE OF
DEFENSE IS THE STATE. AND
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS SENDING A BAD
MESSAGE TO UNSCRUPULOUS
CONTRACTORS THAT ARE TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF THE WORKERS AND NOT
TO MENTION THAT PEOPLE IS LOSING
FAITH ON THE STATE AS THE
ENFORCER OF LABOR LAWS, SO I'M
HERE ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT AND
TO PASS 2135 AS THIS LAW AT THIS
BILL WILL PROVIDE PROTECTIONS
AND FAIRNESS AND JUSTICE FOR
EMPLOYEES. THANK YOU. THANKS. DO
WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
SUPPORT TO STATE YOUR NAME AND
POSITION? GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR
AND MEMBERS MARTIN VIOLA ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE
ASSOCIATION OF ELECTRICAL
WORKERS, THE CALIFORNIA PIPE
TRADES COUNCIL AND THE WESTERN
STATES COUNCIL OF SHEET METAL
WORKERS. THANK YOU ALL IN
SUPPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON. VINCE
SERU WITH SHEET METAL WORKERS,
LOCAL UNION NUMBER 104 AND
SUPPORT GOOD AFTERNOON ELMER
LAZARD WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
FEDERATION IN SUPPORT. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MIKE WEST ON BEHALF
OF THE UM STATE BUILDING AND
CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL.
ALSO IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY MAIN
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION?
MADAM CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE SCOTT GOVERNOR HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CONSTRUCTION
EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION, WERE THE
LARGEST UNION SIGNATORY BUILDING
CONTRACTORS IN THE STATE HERE IN
RESPECTFUL OPPOSITION. CERTAINLY
IT'S IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO
ENSURE THAT WORKERS ARE PAID.
THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT THE
PROPONENTS HAVEN'T PROVIDED ANY
EVIDENCE THAT A PROBLEM ACTUALLY
EXISTS. THERE'S NÓ DATA IN THE
ANALYSIS, THE FACT SHEETS WHICH
SHOWS THIS IS A LEGITIMATE
PROBLEM. THEY POINT TO A SINGLE
PROJECT. BUT THE INTERESTING
THING IS, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN
THAT COMPLAINT WAS FILED WITH
RESPECT TO WHEN THE PROJECT WAS
COMPLETED. FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF
THE OPPONENTS SUGGESTED THEY GO
TO WORK SITES AND THEY FILE
COMPLAINTS RIGHT THEN AND THERE
RIGHT ON THE SPOT. THE 18 MONTHS
DOESN'T APPLY. IN THAT SCENARIO.
THE 18 MONTHS KICKS IN ONCE A
PROJECT IS COMPLETED. SO IF THEY
FILE A PRO A COMPLAINT TODAY ON
THE ANNEX, FOR EXAMPLE, Dð L S¼.
èC DOESN'T HAVE TO RESOLVE THAT
COMPLAINT UNTIL LET'S SAY THE
PROJECT'S DONE IN 27 UNTIL MID
28. THEY GET FIVE YEARS TO
RESOLVE THAT ASSESSMENT, SO I'M
NOT SURE WHERE THE DISCONNECT
HERE. MAYBE IT'S A
MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW. BUT
THE 18 MONTHS ISN'T REALLY
APPLICABLE, AND NOW WE'RE
CREATING AN OPEN ENDED STATUTE
OF LIMITATIONS, WHICH, FROM AN
EMPLOYER STANDPOINT IS A
PROBLEM. I GUESS WHAT I WOULD
SUGGEST IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
WORKERS LIVING PAYCHECK TO
PAYCHECK. THE QUESTION IS IF
THEY CONTEND THAT Dð L S¼ èC
ISN'T DOING THEIR JOB. WHY I
MEAN, I'M NOT SURE IT'S
ACCURATE. WE'RE WAITING FOR DATA
FROM Dð L S¼ èC. YOU SHOULD BE
SPEEDING UP THE PROCESS, NOT
SLOWING IT DOWN. UNDER THIS
BILL. THESE WORKERS WON'T BE
PAID FOR YEARS AFTER THEY'RE
COMPLETED WORK, SO IF SOMEONE
HAS PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK,
THEY'RE ALREADY OUT OF LUCK. SO
WE SHOULD BE GOING THE OPPOSITE
DIRECTION, NOT GIVING THEM MORE
TIME FOR THESE REASONS WE ARE
OPPOSED. THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR
MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE CHRIS
WALKER ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA SHEET METAL AIR
CONDITIONING CONTRACTORS. UH, WE
TOO ARE HERE TO OPPOSE THIS BILL
TODAY. UM LIKE THE PREVIOUS
WITNESS WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT
WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF THE
PROBLEM? UM WE DON'T UNDERSTAND
WHY IT'S TAKING SO LONG. UH, OUR
CONTRACTORS LOSE IN THE
MARKETPLACE WHEN WAGE THEFT
OCCURS. WE ARE UNION CONTRACTORS
. WE PAY OUR WAGES. PURSUANT TO
OUR COLLECTIVE BARGAIN AGREEMENT
THAT AT ABOVE PREVAILING WAGE,
UM AND SO WE'RE AS INTERESTED AS
ANYBODY TO GO AFTER THOSE
CONTRACTORS THAT ARE NOT PAYING
WORKERS THEIR PROPER RATE. UM
THERE'S NÓ DAYLIGHT BETWEEN US
AND OUR AND THE PROPONENTS ON
WAGE THEFT. THE QUESTION IS WHAT
IS THIS BILL NEEDED? IT SEEMS TO
BE WAY TOO LONG FOR THE WORKERS
TO BE GETTING THEIR PAY. UH AND
TWO. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT
THAT THE LONGER THAT WE EXTEND
THE TAIL OF LIABILITY, IT
BENEFITS LARGER CONTRACTORS. I
REPRESENT CONTRACTORS THAT ARE
FAMILY OWNED BUSINESSES ALL THE
WAY TO THE VERY LARGE MEGA CORP
CONTRACTORS AND WHAT WE'RE
SEEING IS A DISTURBING TREND IN
CALIFORNIA, WHERE WE'RE LOSING
THE SMALLER AND MEDIUM SIZED
BUSINESSES BECAUSE OF ALL THE
DIFFERENT REGULATIONS AND
CONCERNS LARGER CORPS MUCH
BETTER, UH, TO ENDURE THESE
LONGER TALES OF LIABILITY TO THE
EXTENT THAT WE'RE PUTTING
DEADLINES OUT FURTHER ON THE
HORIZON FOR PEOPLE TO GET THEIR
MONEY. UM, AND IN SOME CASES,
IT'S INDEFINITE. IF AN
INVESTIGATION IS ONGOING, THERE
IS NÓ LIMIT TO THE 24 MONTHS. UM
WE'RE CONCERNED. WE'RE CONCERNED
ABOUT THE ECONOMIC DIVERSITY AND
COMPETITIVENESS IN THE
MARKETPLACE AGAIN. I REPRESENT
VERY LARGE CONTRACTORS, BUT I
ALSO REPRESENT VERY SMALL, SMALL
AND MEDIUM CANNOT HANDLE AND
ENDURE THE LONGER TAIL OF
LIABILITY THAT THIS BILL
CREATES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? ASHLEY
HOFFMAN IS THE CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND
OPPOSITIONAL AND OUR COMMENTS
WITH THE WITNESSES. THANK YOU.
RICHARD MARCUSSON FOR THE
WESTERN ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS
ASSOCIATION. UH, WE SUPPORT THE
ELOQUENT COMMENTS FROM THE OTHER
WITNESSES. WE ARE IN OPPOSITION.
GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS DAVE
WOOLLEY. I'M A SMALL BUSINESS
OWNER AND A FORMER SENIOR DEPUTY
WITH THE CALIFORNIA LABOR
COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE
RESPONSIBLE FOR UH, ENFORCING
THESE LAWS AND THE TWO GENTLEMEN
IN OPPOSITION FRAMED IT VERY
WELL. IT'S THE TAIL THAT JUST
YOUR NAME AND POSITION. HAVE A
NICE DAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES. OK QUESTIONS FROM ANY
OF OUR MEMBERS. CAN DO WE HAVE A
MOTION IN A SECOND. OH, FAMILY
MEMBER CRAIG HILL. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. UM AND THANK YOU TO
THE AUTHOR FOR BRINGING THIS
BILL FORWARD. UM, I WANNA THANK
THE TWO GENTLEMEN IN SUPPORT OF
THE BILL WHO ARE HERE AND JUST
SAY PL A AGREEMENTS SHOULD BE
ABSOLUTELY, UM GUARANTEED AND
INSURED IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. NÓ DOUBT ABOUT THAT,
UH, TO THE GENTLEMAN IN
OPPOSITION. YOU BRING UP SOME
VERY VALID POINTS IN TERMS OF
THE WAY THAT THE LABOR
COMMISSIONER AND THE LABOR
COMMISSION IN GENERAL HOW THEIR
TIMELINES WORK AND HOW THEY MAY
NOT WORK TO PROTECT WORKERS AT
THE END OF THE DAY BECAUSE OF
VARIOUS DIFFERENT ISSUES. A
COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, CALMATTERS
ISSUED. UM UH, A REPORT AND THIS
IS THE THIS MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO
YOU, UM AND TO THE AUTHOR THAT
THERE IS A HUGE BACKLOG WITH
REGARDS TO THE TIMELINE OF WHEN
SOMEONE PUTS IN A, UM A
COMPLAINT OR A CLAIM TO, UH, THE
LABOR COMMISSIONER. AND THE TIME
IT TAKES FOR THAT CLAIM TO BE
EVEN LOOKED AT OR RESOLVED. I'M
WORKING ON A POLICY THAT
ACTUALLY ALLOWS KELLY CHAR TO BE
ABLE TO HIRE MORE INDIVIDUALS ON
THE STATE SIDE BECAUSE EVERY
AGENCY IN EVERY DEPARTMENT IS
COMPLETELY UM THEY'RE NOT FULLY
STAFFED, AND SO WE HAVE A HUGE
BACKLOG OF CLAIMS OF WAGE THEFT
OR P AGREEMENTS NOT BEING
VERIFIED, ETCETERA, ETCETERA. SO
MY SUGGESTION TO YOU WOULD BE
POTENTIALLY TO SPEAK TO THE
CHAIR OF BUDGETS OF FOREIGN
STATE ADMINISTRATION AND SEE HOW
THE LABOR COMMISSIONERS, UM MOST
RECENT CHANGES WITHIN THE
DEPARTMENT CAN HELP YOUR BILL
AND ENSURE THAT WORKERS HAVE
THEIR CLAIMS VERIFIED WHILE AT
THE SAME TIME THE ISSUE THAT THE
CLAIM DOESN'T START UNTIL THE
END OF THE COMPLETION OF THE
PROJECT. SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS
LIKE A DISCONNECT OF VALID
CLAIMS VERSUS ALSO THE WAY THAT
THE DEPARTMENT AND THE AGENCY
ITSELF MOVES THOSE CLAIMS
FORWARD IN A TIMELY AND
EFFICIENT MANNER THAT HELPS THE
WORKERS BUT ALSO ENSURES THAT
THE COMPANIES ARE RESPONSIVE AND
ALSO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
PROVIDE DATA. I THINK AT THE END
OF THE DAY THERE'S NÓ
DISAGREEMENT HERE THAT SHOULD BE
HONORED AND THAT EMPLOYEES
SHOULD BE PAID, AND THE COMPANY
SHOULD ALSO HAVE A REASONABLE
TIME TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD
ON BOTH SIDES. BUT THIS IS ALSO
POST COVID AND SO POST COVID. WE
ARE STILL NOT FULLY STAFFED, AND
THERE'S STILL A LOT OF LAGS IN
THE AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS. SO
I HOPE I BELIEVE THAT YOUR BILL
HAS REALLY GOOD INTENT. AND I
HOPE THAT, UM THE LABOR
COMMISSIONER ALSO HAS THE STAFF
THAT'S AVAILABLE TO FULLY HELP
YOU WHILE AT THE SAME TIME
LOOKING AT THEIR OWN. LINES TO
ENSURE THAT THE POLICIES MOVING
FORWARD AREN'T IN CONTRADICTION
TO THE SET OF GUIDELINES THAT
THEY THEMSELVES HAVE FOR THE
DEPARTMENT. YEAH, IF I MAY. I UM
I COMPLETELY AGREE. AND I THINK
THE SHORT STAFFING IS EXACTLY
ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES THAT
WE'RE FACING. THE PROBLEM IS,
THE WORKERS ARE PUNISHED BECAUSE
OF THAT, AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM
RIGHT? SO WE DON'T WANT CASES TO
BE CLOSED BECAUSE DLS IS SHORT
STAFFED, AND THEY JUST COULDN'T
GET TO IT IF YOU KNOW, AND GREG
CAN SPEAK ABOUT THE CASE
SPECIFICALLY IN MY DISTRICT, UH,
RELATED TO OUR SENIOR CENTER,
BUT YOU KNOW, HE HE THEY HAD
BEEN RESPONSIVE EVERY TIME THEY
WERE ASKED A QUESTION BY BY Dð L
S¼, A RESPONSIVE IMMEDIATELY
RESPONSIVE IMMEDIATELY AND IT
WOULD TAKE MONTHS FOR Dð Dð L S¼
E TO COME BACK AND ASK ANOTHER
QUESTION. AND THEN, AT THE END
OF THE DAY, THE CASE WAS CLOSED
BECAUSE OF THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS, NOT BECAUSE THEY
WEREN'T RESPONSIVE, NOT BECAUSE
THEY DIDN'T DO THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY, NOT BECAUSE THE
WORKERS DIDN'T DESERVE A CLEAR
DECISION, AND I THINK WE ALL
AGREE THAT WE WANT DECISIONS AS
QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. THAT
CERTAINLY IS A BENEFIT FOR THE
WORKERS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT
TO HAVE HAPPEN. BUT IF THE
PEOPLE WHO SUBMITTED THE
COMPLAINT ARE WORKING IN EARNEST
AND MOVING THE CASE FORWARD AND
THE DELAYS HAPPENING ON THE Dð L
S¼ SIDE FOR GOOD REASONS,
SOMETIMES RIGHT, THEN THERE
NEEDS TO BE AN ABILITY TO GET TO
RESOLUTION FOR THAT WORKER AND
NOT JUST SHUT DOWN. UM THE
COMPLAINT BECAUSE WE REACHED A
TIME LIMIT. THIS IS SIMPLY
EXTENDING IT AN EXTRA SIX MONTHS
. NOT UNREASONABLE. UM OUR
INTENT IS NOT TO EXTEND IT INTO
INFINITY AND BEYOND. UM AND SO
WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH FOLKS
TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S NOT AN
THE CONSEQUENCE OF WHAT THE BILL
IS, YOU KNOW WORKING TO DO, BUT
WE SIMPLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THERE'S RESOLUTION FOR WORKERS
IN THIS PROCESS AND THAT THEY'RE
NOT LEFT OUT IN THE COLD AND I
YOU KNOW, WOULD LOVE FOR ANDRE
AND, UM AND GREG TO CHIME IN TO
ANSWER ANY OF THE OTHER CONCERNS
THAT WERE RAISED. WELL DURING
THAT CHAIR. YEAH GO AHEAD
THROUGH THE CHAIR. UM UH, JUST
TO ADDRESS, UH, ONE COMMENT THAT
WAS MENTIONED AND, YOU KNOW, I
JUST GAVE IT ONE SPECIFIC CASE
ON 11 JOB. THIS HAPPENS ALL THE
TIME, AND WE MONITOR PREVAILING
WAGE JOBS. MOST OF THEM ARE NOT
A PRO PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT
JOB. THEY'RE JUST STRICT. UH,
STRICTLY, UH, PREVAILING WAGE
JOBS. AND AS SOON AS WE FIND OUT
, YOU KNOW, LIKE WE SEND OUR
APPRENTICES TO THESE JOBS, AND
SOMETIMES THEY'LL SAY THEY'LL
GIVE US REASONS THAT JUST RED
FLAGS GO OFF THAT THINGS AREN'T
THAT THE PREVAILING WAGE LAWS
AREN'T BEING FOLLOWED AND WE
STARTED COMPLIANCE CASE AND WE
TURN IT INTO THE Dð L S¼ èC
WHILE THE WHILE THE JOB IS GOING
ON. WE DON'T WAIT TILL THE JOBS
REACHED ITS COMPLETION DATE TO
FILE THESE COMPLAINTS. SO
EVERYTHING WE'RE DOING IS WITHIN
THAT TIMELINE. AND LIKE LIKE, UM
MÀ, CHAO SAID. IT'S JUST, UH THE
WORKERS ARE PAYING THE PRICE FOR
IT. AND. OK SO I WOULD LIKE TO
CLARIFY HERE THAT, UM, MY OFFICE
HAS BEEN SENDING CASES WITH
AMPLE TIME TO THE Dð L èC. AND
DON'T TAKE ME WRONG. WE
COOPERATED WITH THEM AS I HAVE
MENTIONED IN THE PAST. WE
UNDERSTAND YOU KNOW THE ISSUES
AND THE PROBLEMS THAT THEY ARE
DEALING WITH. UH, BUT IN THE
SAME WAY WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT
ULTIMATELY, WORKERS ARE PUTTING
THEIR HOPES. IN THEIR HANDS AND
AFTER A CASE REACHES ITS START
THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.
THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THAT CAN BE
DONE. I CONTINUOUSLY HAVE
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE HEAD OF
THE LABOR COMPLIANCE. I'M SORRY
OF THE Dð L S¼ èC DIVISION OF
LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT FOR
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. AND HE HAS
BEEN TELLING ME FOR QUITE A LONG
TIME THAT THEY ARE GOING TO
IMPROVE IN THE WAY HOW THEY
HANDLE CASES. UM BUT LIKE I SAID
, BEFORE, IN SOME CASES, WE HAVE
SENT OUT OUR COMPLAINTS TO THE
STATE WITH AMPLE TIME NOT WE'RE
NOT TALKING ABOUT WEEKS OR
MONTHS, BUT YEARS AND THEN WE
ARE FOLLOWING WITH THE Dð L S¼ E
, AND WE HAVE BEEN GETTING
RESPONSES EVERY SINGLE 23 MONTHS
THAT WE JUST ASK FOR A QUESTION
AND WHAT THEY GET FROM THEM IS.
OH, YEAH. CASE IN PROGRESS CASE
IS UNDER INVESTIGATION. BUT IN
THE CASE EXPIRES AT THE END OF
THOSE TWO YEARS, AND THEN THAT
IS LEAVING THOSE WORKERS WITHOUT
ANY HOPE. ANY OTHER RESOURCE TO
GO? SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO
IS, UH, OBVIOUSLY AS IT WAS
MENTIONED BEFORE, WE DON'T WANT
TO EXTEND THESE THESE CASES
FOREVER. THAT IS NOT THE
INTENTION WHATSOEVER. WE
UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS THE
BEST INTEREST. YOU KNOW, IT'S IN
THE BEST INTEREST TO PROTECT THE
WORKERS. UM SO, UH, PROMPT, UH,
WAY TO, YOU KNOW, HANDLE THESE
CASES IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR
HERE AND TO PROVIDE THE Dð L S¼
E WITH AT LEAST TIME TO PROCESS
THESE CASES AND DO NOT LET THEM
EXPIRE BECAUSE ULTIMATELY
THERE'S HUMAN LIVES. THAT ARE
BEING AFFECTED FOR THESE CASES
WHEN THESE CASES EXPIRE. THANK
YOU. YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.
JUST A FOLLOW UP. I THINK, UM
WHAT I'M WHAT I'M HEARING, YOU
SAY IS THAT IT'S NOT JUST AN
ISSUE OF WHEN YOU FILE A CASE
WITH AMPLE TIME AND GIVING THE
DEPARTMENT SIX EXTRA MONTHS TO
COMPLETE IT, BUT WHAT I'M
HEARING IS THAT THERE IS A
DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT ACTUALLY ACHIEVING AN
END RESULT WITHIN A CERTAIN
AMOUNT OF TIME. SO EVEN IF YOU
WERE TO EXTEND IT SIX MONTHS IS
THERE SOMETHING IN YOUR BILL
THAT SAYS THAT THEY MUST BE DONE
WITH THE COMPLETION OF A CASE BY
A CERTAIN TIME SO THAT EVEN IF
THOSE SIX MONTHS WERE TO BE
GRANTED, AND THEY STILL DON'T
FIND IT, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THE
SAME RESULT. YOU'RE STILL GONNA
HAVE CASES THAT ARE UM NOT
COMPLETED OR THAT THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATION. UH, EXPIRES. SO IS
THE ISSUE HERE. THE EXTENSION OF
MORE TIME OR IS THE ISSUE THAT
THE DEPARTMENT IT'S NOT DOING
ITS JOB ACCORDINGLY ON A TIMELY
MANNER. SO WE YES. THE BILL SAYS
AN INVESTIGATION SHALL NOT BE
DISMISSED SOLELY ON THE BASIS
THAT THE LABOR COMMISSION OR
THEIR DESIGNEE DID NOT COMPLETE
THEIR REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT
WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME. SO
BASICALLY JUST MEETING THE
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IS NOT
SUFFICIENT TO CLOSE A CASE. UM
AND THAT'S YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE
MAIN POINTS OF THE BILL, UM, SO
YOU KNOW, IN IN IN THE
EXPERIENCES THAT WE'VE HAD, AND
YOU KNOW TO SAY THERE'S NOT A
PROBLEM HERE IN 25, OR MORE
PERCENT OF THE CASES THAT
COVERING AND WORKING ON ON A
REGULAR BASIS. THEY DID A
ASSESSMENT OF OVER 400 BILLS AND
OVER 100 OF THEM CAME BACK
CLOSED JUST BECAUSE THE STAFF
BECAUSE OF THE STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS, YOU KNOW IS THAT I
THINK SHORT STAFFING HAS A LOT
TO DO WITH IT RIGHT. PEOPLE ARE
NOT ABLE TO DO THE FULL
INVESTIGATION GET THROUGH
COMPLETING THE CASE, AND YOU
KNOW, AS ANDRE SAID, PEOPLE ARE
PUTTING THEIR THEIR THEIR
LIVELIHOODS ON IT IN OUR HANDS
AND TRUSTING THAT WE'RE GOING TO
SEE THROUGH AN INVESTIGATION, UM
AND AT LEAST DELIVER A RESPONSE.
EVEN IF THE RESPONSE IS NÓ. WE
DON'T FIND A VIOLATION HERE.
THERE SHOULD BE A CONCLUSION TO
THE CASE, AND IT'S NOT JUST
ALWAYS COMING UP AGAINST A
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS BECAUSE
THEY'RE SHORT STAFFED. ANY OTHER
MEMBER QUESTION. OK? AND DO WE
HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR A
B 21 THREE FIVE. WELL. SECOND
SECRETARY. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
THE MOTION IS DUE PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. ORTEGA ORTEGA I
FLORA FLORA, NOT VOTING, ALAN.
ALANIS, NOT VOTING, WENDY CREO.
WHEN WENDY èC I LE LE A WARD.
WOULD I SUBER? THE EYE THAT
MEASURES UP THE MEASURE PASSES.
THANK YOU.
SO OUR FINAL ITEM IS A B 2011
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS THE BURR WILL
BE PRESENTING FOR ASSEMBLY
MEMBER MAYOR KHAN.
THANKS FOR DOING THIS. MADAM
CHAIR MEMBERS. I'M PROUD TODAY
TO PRESENT A B 1211 A BILL THAT
ESTABLISHES THE PERMANENCY OF
THE SMALL EMPLOYER FAMILY LEAVE
MEDIATION PROGRAM UNDER THE
CIVIL RIGHTS DEPARTMENT. THIS
BILL ALLOWS EMPLOYEES AND SMALL
BUSINESSES TO MEDIATE THEIR
CLAIMS THROUGH A FREE CHARGE
PROGRAM. DUE TO CONCERNS ABOUT
COSTLY LITIGATION AND SMALL
BUSINESSES, ABILITY TO UPHOLD
CALIFORNIA FAMILY RIGHTS ACT
STANDARDS, THE LEGISLATURE
ESTABLISHED THE SMALL EMPLOYER,
FAMILY LEAVE MEDIATION PILOT
PROGRAM IN BUDGET BILL A B 1030
THREE IN, UH FROM 2020. AS WE
KNOW SMALL BUSINESSES SUPPORT
THE FOUNDATION OF CALIFORNIA
THEIR INTEGRAL PARTS OF LOCAL
ECONOMIES. THEY CREATE
MEANINGFUL JOBS AND LASTING
IMPRESSIONS. THE TOUGH TRUTH IS
THAT MOST SMALL BUSINESSES
CANNOT SURVIVE LAWSUITS DUE TO
THE IMPACTS OF LEGAL FEES. THIS
PROGRAM HAS PROVEN SUCCESSFUL AT
MEDIATING CLAIMS BETWEEN SMALL
BUSINESSES AND EMPLOYEES.
RESPECTFULLY THE PROGRAM HAS
MEDIATED 555 COMPLAINTS AND
PROVIDED A TOTAL SETTLEMENT
AMOUNT OF $688,250, ALL OF WHICH
IS PAID TO THE RESPECTIVE
COMPLAINANTS. SECONDLY THIS BILL
ADDS REPRODUCTIVE LOSS TO THE
TYPES OF LEAVE THAT THE PROGRAM
APPLIES TO TODAY TO SPEAK IN
SUPPORT. WE HAVE ASHLEY HOFFMAN
WITH THE CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE. AN AUGUSTINE FROM THE
FAMILY BUSINESS ASSOCIATION. UH,
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS ASHLEY HOFFMAN
ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. UH, WE
REALLY WANNA THANK THE
LEGISLATURE FOR IMPLEMENTING
THIS PROGRAM IN 2020 TO ENSURE
THAT OUR VERY SMALLEST
BUSINESSES HAVE AN AVENUE TO
RESOLVE ANY DISPUTES THAT ARISE
CONCERNING LEAVE. UM, BUT WE
HAVE WORKSHOP THIS BILL. WE'VE
MADE SOME TWEAKS ALONG THE WAY
TO ENSURE AND IMPROVE. UH SORRY
TO IMPROVE ITS FUNCTIONALITY. UM
AND WE ARE VERY, VERY HAPPY THAT
IN TALKING TO THE DEPARTMENT,
THEY DO CONSIDER THE PROGRAM TO
BE SUCCESSFUL. UM, AS WAS STATED
MORE THAN HALF OF THE CASE. IS
THAT THEY HAVE MEDIATED HAVE
RESULTED IN SETTLEMENT WITH ALL
OF THE FUNDS GOING TO THE
WORKERS. UM SO WE'RE VERY HAPPY
WITH THE DISCUSS OF THE PROGRAM.
UM AND WE THINK YOU KNOW, WITH
COST OF LEGAL FEES AND ILLEGAL
SERVICES ON THE RISE. WE THINK
THIS NÓ CHARGE PROGRAM IS A WIN
WIN FOR BOTH SIDES, AND WE URGE
YOUR SUPPORT TODAY TO MAKE THIS
PROGRAM PERMANENT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM
CHAIR AND MEMBERS ANNALEE
AUGUSTINE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
FAMILY BUSINESS ASSOCIATION OF
CALIFORNIA, AN ORGANIZATION
DEDICATED TO HELPING THE 1.4
MILLION FAMILY OWNED BUSINESSES
IN CALIFORNIA SURVIVE AND THRIVE
. UM AND ALSO DEEPLY DEDICATED
TO THE 7 MILLION EMPLOYEES OF
FAMILY BUSINESSES IN CALIFORNIA.
THOUSANDS OF FAMILY OWNED
BUSINESSES IN THE STATE HAVE
BETWEEN FIVE AND 19 EMPLOYEES
AND WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS
PROGRAM. MANY OF THOSE ALSO DO
LACK RESOURCES SUCH AS TIME AND
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO
LITIGATE AND FOR SMALL
BUSINESSES. ONE LAWSUIT CAN BE
DETRIMENTAL FAMILY BUSINESSES
DEEPLY VALUE, FLEXIBILITY AND
TIME OFF FOR THE TYPES OF LEAVE
THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS
PROGRAM, TOO. AND SO, UM AND SO,
AS YOU KNOW, FAMILY BUSINESSES.
IT'S REALLY EMBEDDED IN THEIR
STRUCTURES. UM TO HAVE THIS
FLEXIBILITY OFTENTIMES, TOO. UM
THEY'LL THINK THAT THEY'RE IN
COMPLIANCE WITH ALL OF THE LAWS
AND THEY'LL BE ACTING IN GOOD
FAITH AND NOT REALIZE THAT THERE
MIGHT BE SOME ADMINISTRATIVE
MATTERS THAT WEREN'T HANDLED
CORRECTLY. AND SO THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MEDIATE PRIOR TO
LITIGATION IS EXTREMELY HELPFUL.
STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT FAMILY
BUSINESSES PROMOTE WOMEN TO
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT FASTER THAN
OTHER IS AND THEN ALSO, UH, ARE
LESS LIKELY TO LAY OFF WORKERS
DURING TOUGH ECONOMIC TIMES. SO
AGAIN, WE'RE DEDICATED TO
HELPING THOSE FAMILY BUSINESSES,
MANY OF THEM SMALL BUSINESSES
THAT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS.
UM, FOR THOSE REASONS. WE'RE
PLEASED TO SUPPORT THE BILL.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU ANY
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES IN SUPPORT?
MADAM CHAIR CHRIS MALLEY ON
BEHALF OF THE L, A, UH, CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE AS WELL AS THE
HOLLYWOOD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
AND SUPPORT. THANK YOU. RICHARD
MARSON FOR THE WESTERN
ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS
ASSOCIATION AND STRONG SUPPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, ANTHONY
TANNEHILL, CALIFORNIA SPECIAL
DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT LAWRENCE GÂY ON BEHALF
OF THE CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURERS
AND TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT THANK YOU. ANY WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION. ANY QUESTIONS
FROM OUR MEMBERS. IS THERE A
MOTION? SO WE HAVE A MOTION IN A
SECOND SECRETARY. PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. THE MOTION IS TO PASS
TO JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. ORTEGA
AYE, ORTEGA I FLORA FLORA I
ALANIS ALANIS. I WENDY CREO.
WENDY CREOLE, A LEE LEE A WARD.
WOULD I BE? I MEAN A IZ. I THAT
MEASURES OUT ON BEHALF OF
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BY OUR CANON.
THANK YOU ALL. AND NOW WE WILL
OPEN THE ROLL FOR ABSENT
MEMBERS. A B 1832 THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. WORD WORD. I ZER ZUR.
AYE. A B 1840 THREE. WARD WARD.
I ZIPPER ZIPPER. I.
SEEING NÓ FURTHER BUSINESS. WE
ARE ADJOURNED.