BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                            Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair


          AB 1165 (Skinner) - Occupational Safety and Health: Violations
          
          Amended: June 13, 2013          Policy Vote: L&IR 4-0
          Urgency: No                     Mandate: No
          Hearing Date: August 30, 2013                           
          Consultant: Robert Ingenito     
          
          SUSPENSE FILE. AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED


          Bill Summary: AB 1165 would require that the Occupational Safety  
          and Health Appeals Board (OSHAB) may only stay the abatement of  
          a serious, willful or repeat violation if the employer has a  
          high likelihood of successfully contesting the violation and  
          that staying the abatement does not adversely impact the health  
          or safety of employees.

          Fiscal Impact: The Department of Industrial Relations (DIR)  
          estimates that it would incur annual costs of $1.1 million  
          (special funds) to implement the provisions of the bill.

          Background: Under current law, DIR's Division of Occupational  
          Safety and Health (DOSH) may issue a citation or notice of  
          proposed penalty to an employer if it determines that the  
          employer has violated existing law.  The citation is required to  
          be in writing and specifically describe the nature of the  
          violation.  Moreover, current law requires the citation to fix a  
          reasonable time for the abatement of the alleged violation.  An  
          employer may appeal the citation by filing an appeal with OSHAB  
          within 15 days of receiving the citation.  However, there is  
          generally no obligation for an employer to abate the alleged  
          violation while the appeal is pending, even if that timeframe  
          extends for months or even years; consequently, a workplace  
          could remain dangerous for an extended period after a DOSH  
          inspector has ruled it to be unsafe.

          Proposed Law: This bill would provide that any appeal of a  
          citation or special order that is classified and cited as a  
          serious violation, a willful violation, a repeated serious  
          violation, or a failure to abate a serious violation may not  
          stay the abatement dates unless:









          AB 1165 (Skinner)
          Page 1


          1) The employer requests a stay of abatement; and

          2) DIR determines that there is a substantial likelihood of  
          success by the employer on the contested matters and that a stay  
          will not adversely affect the health and safety of employees. 


          Related Legislation: AB 1988 (Swanson) of 2008 would have  
          provided that an abatement measure required by DOSH shall not be  
          stayed pending an employer's appeal unless the employer  
          indicated by verified petition that it seeks a stay of abatement  
          and the reasons why abatement is not necessary to protect the  
          health or safety of employees.  AB 1988 was held in this  
          Committee. 

          Staff Comments: This bill provides that an appeal, filed by an  
          employer from a workplace safety or health citation or notice  
          for failure to abate (correct) or for a violation that is  
          classified as serious, repeat serious, willful, willful serious  
          or willful repeat, does not automatically stay the requirements  
          to abate the hazard that caused the citation or notice. DOSH  
          must stay the abatement measures if it determines a stay will  
          not adversely affect the health and safety of employees, and has  
          discretion to stay abatement while a motion to stay abatement is  
          pending. The employer may request an expedited hearing on the  
          motion to stay abatement.
           
          Basic due process requires an employer be provided with a  
          mechanism to be heard prior to taking the employer's property.  
          The California Code of Regulations set out the existing  
          procedures for permit denials or when an Order Prohibiting Use  
          (OPU) is issued.  An OPU hearing is required by statute to be  
          held within 24 hours because the Division has shut down the  
          employer's equipment or operation. For other hearings, the  
          regulations provide for a hearing no sooner than five working  
          days after the request for hearing is received. DOSH expects  
          many more requests for hearings by employers seeking a stay of  
          abatement measures than it gets for OPUs or permit denials,  
          requiring district or regional managers and/or attorneys to act  
          as hearing officers and to represent the Division in the hearing  
          process, which will add workload. Determinations that a stay of  
          abatement would not adversely affect the health and safety of  
          employees and confirmation of what measures the employer would  
          provide to ensure worker safety and health would also require  








          AB 1165 (Skinner)
          Page 2


          investigation by the Division and a hearing process, resulting  
          in additional costs to the Division.
           
          According to DIR, roughly 2,400 serious citations are issued per  
          year, of which approximately 25 percent (or 600) are unabated.   
          Of these, DIR estimates that 500 citations would be subject to  
          this hearing process. Staffing requirements to implement the  
          bill include attorney (2PY) and field inspector (3.5PY)  
          positions to verify conditions and claims, as specified, with an  
          estimate cost of $1.1 million.

          Author's Amendments would eliminate two types of violations from  
          the bill.