BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 117 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 117 (Kehoe) As Amended June 30, 2011 Majority vote SENATE VOTE :21-15 BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS 6-3 JUDICIARY 7-3 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Hayashi, Allen, Butler, |Ayes:|Feuer, Atkins, Dickinson, | | |Eng, Hill, Ma | |Huber, | | | | |Huffman, Monning, | | | | |Wieckowski | | | | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| |Nays:|Bill Berryhill, Hagman, |Nays:|Wagner, Beth Gaines, | | |Smyth | |Jones | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Prohibits a state agency from entering into a goods or services contract worth $100,000 or more, if in the provision of benefits, the contractor discriminates between employees with same or different sex spouses or partners, or discriminates between same or different sex spouses or partners of employees. EXISTING LAW : 1)Prohibits a state agency from entering into a goods or services contract worth $100,000 or more, if in the provision of benefits, the contractor discriminates between employees with spouses and employees with domestic partners, or discriminates between the domestic partners and spouses of those employees. 2)Provides that, notwithstanding any other law, that same-sex marriages entered outside of California before passage of Proposition 8 will be legally recognized as such in California; and couples in all such marriages entered into after passage of Proposition 8 will have all of the same rights, responsibilities and obligations as married couples, with the sole exception of using the legal designation of "marriage." SB 117 Page 2 FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This bill has been keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel. COMMENTS : According to the author, "The playing field for contractors needs to be leveled by ensuring that entities that discriminate are not given a competitive advantage over those who treat their employees equally. Providing the same benefits to an employee with a domestic partner, or same-sex or opposite-sex spouse ensures that workers receive equal pay for equal work. To do otherwise is essentially to discriminate against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees. "Providing equal benefits also shows respect for the diversity of employees and their individual circumstances. Additionally, treating employees fairly is a sound business practice. A non-discriminatory benefits program enables employers to attract and retain the best and most talented employees, lowers turnover and recruitment costs, and helps improve employee job satisfaction and performance." AB 17 (Kehoe), Chapter 752, Statutes of 2003, prohibited a state agency from entering into a contract for goods or services with a contractor who discriminates in the provision of benefits between employees with spouses and employees with domestic partners or between the spouses and domestic partners of those employees. The sponsors note that several municipalities have already passed ordinances similar to the language contained in this bill. This bill arose as a result of these recent laws affecting legal marriages and same-sex couples, and prohibits a state agency from entering into a goods or services contract worth $100,000 or more, if in the provision of benefits, the contractor discriminates based on the gender or sexual orientation of the spouses or domestic partners of its employees. As a result of SB 54 (Leno), Chapter 625, Statutes of 2009, this bill applies to out-of-state contractors conducting business in the state. Analysis Prepared by : Joanna Gin / B.,P. & C.P. / (916) 319-3301 SB 117 Page 3 FN: 0001468