BILL ANALYSIS SB 657 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 657 (Steinberg) As Amended June 30, 2010 Majority vote SENATE VOTE :24-13 JUDICIARY 7-2 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Feuer, Brownley, Evans, | | | | |Huffman, Jones, Monning, | | | | |Saldana | | | | | | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Hagman, Knight | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Seeks to provide consumers with new and easily accessible information made available by specified large retailers and manufacturers about these businesses' voluntary efforts, whatever they may be, to try to eradicate slavery and human trafficking that could inadvertently be in their product supply chains. Specifically, this bill : 1)Makes various legislative findings, including that it is the policy of this state to ensure large retailers and manufacturers provide consumers with information regarding their efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from their supply chains, to educate consumers on how to purchase goods produced by companies that responsibly manage their supply chains, and, thereby, to improve the lives of victims of slavery and human trafficking. 2)Requires, after a one year "phase in" period, beginning January 1, 2012 every retail seller and manufacturer doing business in this state and having annual gross receipts that exceed $100 million to disclose its voluntary efforts, including none, to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from its supply chain. 3)Requires this consumer disclosure to be posted on the retail seller's or manufacturer's web site, and for it also to be available in writing upon request by a consumer. In the event SB 657 Page 2 the retail seller or manufacturer does not have a web site, consumers must be provided the written disclosure within 30 days that the business receives the consumer request. 4)Requires the disclosure, at a minimum, to disclose to what extent, including none, that the retail seller or manufacturer does each of the following: a) engages in third-party verification of product supply chains to evaluate and address risks of human trafficking and slavery; b) conducts independent, unannounced audits of suppliers to evaluate supplier compliance with company standards for trafficking and slavery in supply chains; c) requires suppliers to certify that raw materials incorporated into the product comply with the laws regarding slavery and human trafficking of the country or countries in which they are doing business; d) maintains internal accountability standards and procedures for employees or contractors failing to meet company standards regarding slavery and trafficking; and, e) provides company employees and management training on human trafficking and slavery, particularly with respect to mitigating risks within the supply chains of products. 5)Provides that the exclusive remedy for a violation of this measure shall be an action brought by the Attorney General for injunctive relief, and that nothing in the bill shall limit remedies available for a violation of any other state or federal law. 6)Provides that the bill's provisions shall not take effect until January 1, 2012, to provide the designated retail sellers and manufacturers substantial time to comply with the bill's disclosure requirements. FISCAL EFFECT : None COMMENTS : This important consumer empowerment bill is part of a continuing effort by the author to fight the continuing international tragedy of slavery and human trafficking. Through this measure the author seeks to harness the immense economic power of the purchasing decisions of California consumers to help tackle this complex and challenging problem. The bill simply seeks to ensure interested California consumers have reasonable access to basic information to aid their purchasing decisions. It does so by requiring designated major retailers SB 657 Page 3 and manufacturers to disclose their efforts to eradicate slavery and human trafficking that could inadvertently be in their product supply chains. The disclosure must be conspicuously posted on a large retailer's or manufacturer's web site, and also be made available in writing upon request. As shocking as it is to note in the 21st century, human trafficking involves the modern-day recruitment, transportation, or sale of people for forced labor. Through violence, threats, and coercion, these victims are forced to work in, among other things, the sex trade, domestic labor, factories, hotels, and agriculture. California regrettably has been reported to be one of the top four destination states for trafficking victims in the United States. Over 500 victims from 18 countries were identified in California between 1998 and 2003. Trafficking victims in California reportedly tend to be concentrated in three "industries": prostitution, sweat shops, and domestic service. In October 2007, the California Department of Justice released the final report produced by the California ACTS Task Force entitled "Human Trafficking in California," which contained a comprehensive list of findings and recommendations to combat human trafficking. The report stated, "California bears a moral responsibility to exert leadership, through government and business purchasing practices, to implement and monitor codes of conduct assuring fair and human labor practices throughout their supply chain." Indeed, California has had stringent procurement policies in place since 2000 which prohibit state agencies from purchasing goods or services produced by or with the benefit of exploitative forms of labor. In a joint letter, the California Chamber of Commerce, California Grocers Association, California Manufacturers and Technology Association, California Retailers Association, and TechAmerica write in opposition to the bill, making three principal contentions: SB 657 would require companies to develop policies with regard to [sic] its entire supply chain, which can include entities far outside the borders of California or the United States. SB 657 Page 4 The policies would need to address specific issues such as third-party verification of product supply chain, independent unannounced audits and certification of raw materials. However it should be noted that the measure does not in fact require companies to develop any policies at all. Instead the bill solely requires, as noted above, that beginning one year after the bill's enactment, only those relatively few giant retail sellers and manufacturers doing business in this state which have annual gross receipts exceeding $100 million (less than 5% of the state's businesses) need disclose their efforts, whatever they may be including if there are none, to eradicate slavery and human trafficking from its supply chain. Private businesses should not be used as the enforcement arm for federal and state laws regarding slavery and human trafficking. That responsibility falls with the federal and state government entities themselves. However it should be noted that the measure does not, as noted above, require the relative narrow number of designated large companies to do anything other than post specified information on their Web sites and also make such information available to interested consumers. The bill does not in any way require these private businesses to act as an enforcement arm of government; indeed, the bill acknowledges that these businesses are still completely free to do anything they want about their efforts to fight human trafficking and slavery, they simply need to note this information on their Web sites and make such information available to interested consumers. [T]he practical effect [of this legislation] will be to hold certain companies up for ridicule and condemnation for "failing" to address issues they are powerless to address. However it should be noted that the measure does not require the relative narrow number of designated large companies to do anything other than post specified information on their Web sites and also make such information available to interested SB 657 Page 5 consumers. If the information the business provides is found by some consumers to reflect inadequate attention to this issue, then that is a business choice as to whether that is a wise course of action. As to whether businesses here in California are completely "powerless to address" the presence of human trafficking and slavery in their product supply chains, as the business trade groups contend, there is ample evidence, as noted above, that to the contrary, some respected California businesses, according to the report issued by the California ACTS Task Force, have already taken the lead to adopt their own codes of conduct that set out minimum labor standards for their suppliers and sub-contractors, voluntarily using their substantial economic power to influence labor and human rights practices within their supply chains. Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0005160