BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de León, Chair
AB 2052 (Gonzales) - Workers' Compensation
Amended: April 8, 2014 Policy Vote: L&IR 5-0
Urgency: No Mandate: Yes
Hearing Date: August 4, 2014
Consultant: Robert Ingenito
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary: AB 2052 would expand existing workers'
compensation presumptions to include all classes of California
peace officers.
Fiscal Impact: The extension of worker's compensation
presumptions beyond the six categories of peace officers
specified in current law would result in substantial costs for
state departments. The exact magnitude is unknown, but could
total in the millions of dollars annually across all state
departments employing peace officers.
Background: Current law creates presumptions to reflect unique
circumstances where injuries or illnesses appear to be logically
work-related, but it is difficult for the safety officer to
prove it is work-related. Presumptions are rebuttable, but
given that many injuries for which presumptions exist can have a
variety of causes, it is difficult to prove they are not
work-related. Thus, it is rare that employers attempt to rebut
presumptions. The absence of a presumption does not mean an
employee does not qualify for workers' comp benefits, but that
an employee must prove an injury is work-related in order to
qualify.
Current law includes presumptions for cancer, lower back
impairment, hernia, heart trouble, tuberculosis, pneumonia,
meningitis, and biochemical exposures. These presumptions
generally apply to a majority of peace officers employed by
public agencies including firefighters, police and sheriffs,
California Highway Patrol, and correctional officers. This bill
would expand current presumptions to additional peace officers,
including local probation officers, UC/CSU police officers, and
a variety of state investigators.
AB 2052 (Gonzales)
Page 1
Some conditions for which presumptions exist are fairly common
in the general population, including cancer (2.8% of US
population), lower back impairment (prevalence estimates range
from 1.0% to 58.1% of adults), and heart disease (over 5% of
California adults and over 20% of US adults over 65).
Presumptions do not appear to have a strong evidence basis, due
in part to the lack of research that can conclusively
demonstrate whether certain job duties are associated with
increased risk of certain conditions. Instead, presumptions are
specified for certain classes based on the judgment that some of
them are likely work-related, but that workers will generally
not be able to meet the burden of proof, such as proving a
cancer was directly linked to job-related exposure. Some work is
ongoing to further explore job-related health risks. A landmark
study by the National Institutes of Safety and Health (NIOSH)
examining 30,000 firefighters for cancer risk strengthens the
scientific evidence that fire fighters are at increased risk of
certain cancers.
Proposed Law: This bill would extend the above-mentioned
presumptions to all peace officers in the State, including the
following classifications:
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control enforcement
agents.
Cal-Expo Police.
Medical Board of California and Board of Dental
Examiners investigators.
Department of Consumer Affairs, Department of Insurance,
Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, Public Employees'
Retirement System, and Department of Managed Health Care
investigators.
Municipal Utility District Security guards.
Welfare Fraud and Child Support investigators.
Sergeant-at-Arms of both Legislative houses.
Bailiffs of the courts.
Security officers of Hastings College of Law.
Regularly employed law enforcement officer of the Oregon
State Police, the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles and
Public Safety, or the Arizona Department of Public Safety,
under specified circumstances.
AB 2052 (Gonzales)
Page 2
Related Legislation: AB 1035 (Perez), Statutes of 2014, Chapter
15, extends the timelines that limit a dependent from filing for
workers' compensation death benefits if the deceased worker died
of Cancer, Tuberculosis, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus
aureus (MRSA) skin infections, or a bloodborne infectious
disease.
Staff Comments: The number of state-level employees affected by
the bill would be small compared to the number at the local
level. Instead, the fiscal impact of this bill would be felt
disproportionately by local jurisdictions.
This bill is keyed as a potential reimbursable mandate. However,
mandate claims are unlikely to be successful, as increased
employee compensation costs mandated by state law that do not
result in a higher level of service to the public are not
generally considered reimbursable.