BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1383|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1383
Author: Assembly Labor and Employment Committee
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE LABOR & INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE : 3-1, 6/26/13
AYES: Monning, Leno, Yee
NOES: Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Padilla
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-20, 5/16/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Employment regulations: local enforcement
SOURCE : California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
DIGEST : This bill explicitly states that nothing in the Labor
Code (LAB) itself prohibits the local enforcement of labor
standards in a manner more stringent than enforcement by the
state.
ANALYSIS : Existing law states that nothing in a specified
"part" of LAB shall be deemed to restrict the exercise of local
police powers in a more stringent manner.
Existing law states that when a local jurisdiction expends funds
that have been provided to it by a state agency, operates a
program that has received assistance from a state agency, or
engages in an activity that has received assistance from a state
agency, labor standards established by the local jurisdiction
CONTINUED
AB 1383
Page
2
through exercise of local police powers or spending powers shall
take effect with regard to that expenditure, program, or
activity, so long as those labor standards are not in explicit
conflict with, or explicitly preempted by, state law.
Existing law states that a state agency may not require as a
condition to the receipt of state funds or assistance that a
local jurisdiction refrain from applying labor standards
established by the local jurisdiction to expenditures, programs,
or activities supported by the state funds or assistance in
question.
This bill explicitly states that nothing in LAB itself prohibits
the local enforcement of labor standards in a manner more
stringent than enforcement by the state.
Prior legislation . AB 2509 (Goldberg, Chapter 298, Statutes of
2002) allows local government agencies to impose labor standards
more stringent than those required by state law on projects
which receive state funding. Specifically, it allows local
jurisdictions to apply labor standards that they have
established to economic development projects that are funded by
the state but administered at the local level, so long as those
standards do not explicitly conflict with state law.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/2/13)
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO (source)
OPPOSITION : (Verified 7/2/13)
Acclamation Insurance Management Services
Allied Managed Care, Inc.
Associated Builders and Contractors of California
California Association of Winegrape Growers
California Chamber of Commerce
California Chapter of American Fence Association
California Employment Law Council
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Fence Contractors' Association
California Framing Contractors' Association
CONTINUED
AB 1383
Page
3
California Grocers Association
California Hospital Association
California Restaurant Association
California Trucking Association
Engineering Contractor's Association
Flasher Barricade Association
Marin Builders Association
National Federation of Independent Business
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the sponsor of the bill,
California Labor Federation, LAB is intended to provide a floor
of set minimum labor standards for all workers in this state.
Proponents argue that local communities should be able to raise
those standards, such as living wage ordinances or local paid
sick days, based on their own assessment of what types of
protections are needed. Proponents argue that this bill makes
it clear that localities are free to pass local ordinances that
supplement and enhance existing statewide protections.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents argue that California has
some of the most onerous wage and hour requirements in the
nation and this bill provides local jurisdictions with the
authority to adopt even more stringent labor and employment
requirements than those already in existence statewide.
Opponents contend that this authority will create a patchwork of
labor and employment laws throughout California that will make
it even more difficult for business to operate, especially small
businesses that do not have the capacity to manage new and
additional labor laws.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-20, 5/16/13
AYES: Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Blumenfield, Bocanegra,
Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,
Ch�vez, Chesbro, Cooley, Dickinson, Fong, Fox, Frazier,
Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gray, Hall, Roger Hern�ndez,
Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lowenthal, Medina, Mitchell, Mullin,
Nazarian, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva,
Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Ting, Weber, Wieckowski, Williams,
Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Achadjian, Bigelow, Conway, Dahle, Daly, Donnelly,
Gorell, Hagman, Harkey, Jones, Linder, Logue, Maienschein,
Mansoor, Muratsuchi, Nestande, Olsen, Patterson, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Buchanan, Eggman, Beth Gaines, Grove,
CONTINUED
AB 1383
Page
4
Holden, Melendez, Morrell, Stone, Torres, Wagner, Vacancy
PQ:k 7/2/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED