BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1313
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1313 (Allen)
As Amended September 2, 2011
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |(June 2, 2011) |SENATE: |22-15|(August 20, |
| | | | | |2012) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
(vote not relevant)
Original Committee Reference: L. & E.
SUMMARY : Makes the daily overtime requirements of current law
that require overtime for hours worked in excess of eight in one
workday applicable to agricultural employees, as specified.
The Senate amendments change the author of the bill, delete the
contents of the bill and instead eliminate the provision of the
Labor Code that exempts agricultural employees from the
following:
1)Overtime compensation when an individual works in excess of
eight hours in one workday or work in excess of 40 hours in
any one workweek:
2)A 30-minute meal break before the start of the fifth hour of
work, unless the work period is no more than six hours and
both the employer and the employee choose to waive the meal
period by mutual consent.
3)A second 30-minute meal break after ten hours of work that can
be waived by the mutual consent of the employer and employee,
if the work period is no more than 12 hours, and the first
meal period was not waived.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill required the Agricultural
Labor Relations Board (ALRB) and its general counsel to post on
their web site specified information about open cases.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS : In 1938, Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA), which established minimum requirements with respect to
AB 1313
Page 2
specified labor standards, including minimum wage and overtime.
The overtime provisions of the FLSA were not extended to
agricultural employees.
However, as with all provisions of the FLSA, states are allowed
to exceed the requirements laid out in the federal law. The
issue of overtime for agricultural employees in California was
first dealt with in 1941. Previously, the law had been silent
on this subject. But in 1941 the Legislature exempted all
agricultural employees from the statutory requirements of
overtime, similar to the FLSA. This statutory exemption was
retained when the 8-hour day was codified in 1999.
This statutory exemption, however, did not prohibit the
Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) from legally promulgating
overtime provisions beyond the traditional 8-hour standard of
California law. Currently, the applicable wage order for
agricultural employees requires the payment of overtime wages
when an agricultural employee works longer than 10 hours in a
single day, and more than six days during any workweek.
With respect to meal periods, the applicable wage order provides
that every employer shall "authorize and permit" agricultural
employees to take a meal period after five hours of work. This
language differs from the statutory meal period language
applicable to other employees that prohibits an employer from
employing a worker longer than five hours without "providing" a
meal period. In addition, the wage order does not require a
second meal period after the tenth hour of work (as the statute
requires for other employees).
This bill proposes to eliminate the statutory exemption for
agricultural employees from overtime and meal periods, thereby
making them subject to the general 8-hour day standard for
overtime and the "provide" meal period standard, as well as the
requirement for a second meal period after ten hours of work.
Proponents argue that agricultural workers face increasingly
difficult working conditions for very low pay. Proponents
believe that agricultural employees should not be treated
differently than other workers, and that the two-tiered overtime
provisions are antiquated and should be abolished.
Opponents argue that California already has the nation's most
AB 1313
Page 3
progressive labor protections for agricultural production, and
that no other state currently requires overtime once
agricultural workers have exceeded the 40 hour work week.
Moreover, opponents argue that due to razor-thin profit margins,
farmers will be forced to cut hours and lay off employees if
they face an increase in labor costs. Opponents believe that
this will hurt the California economy, as agriculture has aided
the state's recovery during the current economic downturn, as
well as place the state's agricultural industry at a competitive
disadvantage.
This bill is identical to SB 1121 (Florez) from last session,
which was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. The Governor's
veto message stated (in part):
"Unfortunately, this measure, while well-intended, will not
improve the lives of California's agricultural workers and
instead will result in additional burdens on California
businesses, increased unemployment, and lower wages. In order
to remain competitive against other states that do not have such
wage requirements, businesses will simply avoid paying overtime.
Instead of working 10-hour days, multiple crews will be hired
to work shorter shifts, resulting in lower take home pay for all
workers. Businesses trying to compete under the new wage rules
may become unprofitable and go out of business, resulting in
further damage to our already fragile economy."
This bill was substantially amended in the Senate and the
Assembly-approved provisions of this bill were deleted.
Analysis Prepared by : Ben Ebbink / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091
FN: 0004487