BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 243
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 243 (Alejo) - As Amended: April 4, 2011
Policy Committee: Labor and
Employment Vote: 5-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill requires a farm labor contractor (FLC) to disclose the
name and address of the grower or other FLC that secured the
employee's services on the itemized payroll statement provided
to the employee. Specifically, this bill:
Specifies that the listing by the FLC of the name and address of
the legal entity that secured the services of the employer on
the itemized statement does not create any liability on the part
of that legal entity.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Minor, absorbable costs to the Department of Industrial
Relations (DIR), offset by civil penalty revenues to enforce
the requirements of this measure. In 2009-10, DIR conducted
1,154 field inspections in the agricultural industry,
including inspecting FLCs. Of the inspections conducted, 62
citations were issued for lack of wage statement or for an
inaccurate, incomplete wage statement. These citations
resulted in the assessment of $540,000 in penalty revenues.
2)By requiring the disclosure of specified information on
employee itemized statements, the bill expands the definition
of a misdemeanor that applies to the failure to provide wage
and related information on employee itemized statements. Any
local enforcement costs are not state-reimbursable.
COMMENTS
AB 243
Page 2
1)Rationale . According to a July 2010 Insure the Uninsured
report brief, California employed approximately 80,000
farmworkers (44% of the nation's farmworkers). The report
further states an estimated 37% of this workforce is employed
by FLCs.
According to the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
(CRLAF), sponsor of this bill, a survey of over 1,000 farm
workers in the central valley revealed that 70% could not
identify the name of the farm they were working on. CRLAF
states, this bill "extends to FLC a fundamental 'right to
know' requirement that has applied to all of the state's
garment contractors since 2002." This bill requires a FLC to
disclose the name and address of the grower or other FLC that
secured the employee's services on the itemized payroll
statement provided to the employee.
2)Existing law requires every employer, at the time of each
payment, to furnish each employee with an itemized payroll
statement that includes information related to wages earned,
hours worked, all deductions, and the name and address of the
legal entity that is the employer. This bill requires the
employer, if he or she is an FLC, to include the name and
address of the grower or other FLC that secured the employee's
services on the payroll statement.
Statute defines an FLC as any person who, for a fee, employs
workers to render personal services in connection with the
production of any farm products to, for, or under the
direction of a third person. Statute also delineates an FLC
as an entity that recruits, solicits, supplies, or hires
workers on behalf of an employer engaged in the growing or
producing of farm products, and for a fee, provides one or
more of the following services: furnishes lodging or
transportation for workers; supervises, times, checks, counts,
weighs, or otherwise directs or measures their work; or
disburses wage payments to these persons.
Generally, under federal and state law, the FLC is considered
to be the employer of farm laborers, and is responsible for
the prompt payment of wages and compliance with applicable
local, state, and federal laws or regulations. Statute
prohibits a person from acting as an FLC until he or she is
issued a license from the state's Labor Commissioner.
AB 243
Page 3
Existing law also requires all garment contractors to provide
the name of the garment manufacturer on an employee's payroll
statement.
3)Previous legislation . AB 2327 (Arambula), nearly identical to
this measure, was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger in
September 2006, with the following message:
"I am supportive of all practical efforts to protect our most
vulnerable workers, such as farm workers, from employers and
contractors that violate labor and workplace safety laws. In
fact, I have increased funding in each of the last two budgets
for labor law enforcement and in 2005 created the Economic and
Employment Enforcement Coalition to focus specifically on
businesses operating in the underground economy.
"However, I am concerned that AB 2327 would have little
practical effect in helping farm workers secure unpaid wages.
Too often, the wages owed farm workers are owed by unlicensed
farm labor contractors. As these individuals have not
bothered to register with the state, it is highly unlikely
they would bother to place additional information on pay
stubs, assuming they issue pay stubs to employees in the first
place. As such, I am concerned that the only practical effect
of AB 2327 will be to place an unnecessary and burdensome
requirement on law-abiding contractors and subject growers to
additional liabilities through no fault of their own.
"California has numerous laws on the books intended to protect
workers from unscrupulous employers. We do not need more
laws, but greater enforcement of existing laws, and more
cooperation between government, worker advocates, and
legitimate employers to ensure those laws are being used to
their fullest extent."
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081