BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 556
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 556 (Corbett)
As Amended August 26, 2013
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :24-13
JUDICIARY 7-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wieckowski, Alejo, Chau, | | |
| |Dickinson, Garcia, | | |
| |Muratsuchi, Stone | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Wagner, Gorell, | | |
| |Maienschein | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Prohibits nongovernmental persons or entities
contracting with public agencies from displaying a logo of a
public agency on a uniform or vehicle, as specified, unless a
disclosure statement is also displayed identifying the identity
of the uniform wearer or vehicle operator providing the labor or
services for the public agency. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes it unlawful for a person, firm, corporation, or
association that is a nongovernmental entity and contracts to
perform labor or services for a public agency to display on a
vehicle a logo of a public agency that reasonably could be
interpreted or construed as implying that the labor or
services are being provided by employees of the public agency,
unless the vehicle displays one of the following disclosures:
a) A conspicuously displayed statement indicating that the
contractor is the service provider, such as "SERVICE
PROVIDED BY:" or "CONTRACTED BY:" immediately followed by
the name of the contractor, its state or federal tax
designation, and its place of legal incorporation; or
b) A conspicuously displayed statement indicating that the
contractor is the service provider, such as "SERVICE
PROVIDED BY:" or "CONTRACTED BY:" immediately followed by
the logo of the contractor providing the labor for the
SB 556
Page 2
public agency.
c) Disclosures on the vehicle meeting the requirements of
Vehicle Code Section 27900 (pertaining to commercial
vehicles) if the contracting party is subject to that
section.
2)Makes it unlawful for a person, firm, corporation, or
association that is a nongovernmental entity and contracts to
perform labor or services for a public agency to display on a
uniform a logo of a public agency that reasonably could be
interpreted or construed as implying that the labor or
services are being provided by employees of the public agency,
unless the uniform displays one of the following disclosures:
a) A conspicuously displayed statement indicating that the
contractor is the service provider, such as "SERVICE
PROVIDED BY:" or "CONTRACTED BY:" immediately followed by
the name of the contractor, its state or federal tax
designation, and its place of legal incorporation; or
b) A conspicuously displayed statement indicating that the
contractor is the service provider, such as "SERVICE
PROVIDED BY:" or "CONTRACTED BY:" immediately followed by
the logo of the contractor providing the labor for the
public agency.
3)Requires the disclosure to be placed near the largest logo
referring to the public agency if the vehicle or uniform
displays more than one such logo.
4)Clarifies that the term "conspicuously displays" means to
display a disclosure that is at least the same size as and
located close to the logo referring to the public agency.
5)Clarifies that the term "logo" means a symbol, graphic, seal,
emblem, insignia, trade name, brand name, picture, or text
identifying a person, firm, corporation, association, or
public agency.
6)Clarifies that an identifying mark affixed to a uniform as
SB 556
Page 3
required by state or federal law, and a local agency
regulating the activity of the person, firm, corporation, or
association shall not be construed as implying that the labor
or services are being provided by employees of the public
agency.
7)Exempts from these disclosure requirements any person or
corporation that is contracted to provide the labor or
services to the public agency under Article 3.3 of the Vehicle
Code (regulating tow trucks).
8)Provides that violations of this act shall be subject to the
remedies provided in the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA)
(Title 1.5 (commencing with Section 1750) of Part 4), and that
the duties, rights, and remedies provided in this bill are in
addition to any other duties, rights, and remedies provided by
state law.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : This bill, co-sponsored by the California Labor
Federation and the California Professional Firefighters, seeks
to prohibit private contractors who contract with public
agencies from displaying a logo of a public agency on a uniform
or vehicle, as specified, that reasonably could be interpreted
as implying that the contracted labor or services are being
provided by employees of the public agency-unless, that is, a
disclosure statement is also conspicuously displayed on the
uniform or vehicle providing specified information about the
private contractor. Violations of this bill may be enforced
using the remedies provided by the CLRA.
According to the author, this bill is needed to ensure that
members of the public can visually distinguish between
government employees and non-government employees who
increasingly are subcontracted to perform public services
traditionally in the domain of public employees. Proponents
assert that the public has the right to know if a particular
worker providing a service that appears public in nature is in
fact a public employee, or is instead an independent contractor,
subcontracted worker, or other non-governmental employee not
working for a public agency. This matters, they contend,
because in certain situations, the public employee is required
to have greater training and is held to a higher degree of
accountability to the public by virtue of being an employee of a
SB 556
Page 4
public agency, rather than that of a private employer or as an
independent contractor. Accordingly, the bill seeks to prevent
confusion or misperceptions that result, proponents contend,
when private contractors hired by public agencies perform
community work or services and use uniforms or vehicles
appearing very similar to those used only by employees of the
public agency. In those circumstances, this bill seeks to
promote transparency by requiring the uniform or vehicle
conspicuously display a disclosure identifying the contractor's
name, state or federal tax designation, and place of
organization or legal incorporation.
Under this bill, a person or company that is a nongovernmental
entity and contracts to perform labor or services for a public
agency must abide by specific disclosure requirements with
respect to that entity's vehicles and uniforms. Unless the
vehicle or uniform at issue displays the identifying information
about the private contractor specified in the bill, the
contracting nongovernmental entity may not display on the
vehicle or uniform a logo of the public agency that "reasonably
could be interpreted or construed as implying that" the service
is being provided by a public employee. As recently amended,
"logo" is defined as a symbol, graphic, seal, emblem, or other
content identifying the company or agency.
Violations of the requirements proposed by this bill may be
enforced using the remedies provided by the CLRA (Civil Code
Section 1750 et seq.) The CLRA establishes a nonexclusive
statutory remedy for unfair methods of competition and unfair
acts or practices in various consumer transactions, as
specified. According to the author, the CLRA offers an
appropriate set of remedies for violations of the bill-remedies
which prioritize disclosure and display requirements over the
recovery of money damages. Specifically, the CLRA allows an
action for injunctive relief to enjoin acts that do not comply
with the bill, in this case non-compliance with the uniform and
vehicle-related display and disclosure requirements of the bill.
In addition, the CLRA requires notice and opportunity to
correct for a period of thirty days before any action for
damages is allowed, including cases where the plaintiff seeks to
amend a complaint for injunctive relief to include a request for
damages.
It is not known whether the most recent amendments have removed
the opposition of a number of groups representing local
SB 556
Page 5
government entities, including, among others, the California
State Association of Counties and the League of California
Cities. These opponents contend that they are unaware of any
problem associated with a private contractor wearing a similar
uniform or having a similar vehicle that causes confusion for
the public, and that the bill is a solution in search of a
problem. Furthermore, opponents contend that allowing similar
uniforms and vehicles to be used by contractors should be a
matter of local control. According to the joint letter
submitted by these opponents addressing the previous version of
the bill, "Many public agencies that contract for services
specify uniform requirements and/or affixing logos to a vehicle
in their written contracts with a service provider. These
uniform requirements are oftentimes done for the purpose of
ensuring that the public knows who the contractor is serving and
for identifying regional operations during a major disaster or
mutual aid request from a public agency. This bill would
eliminate public agencies' ability to determine what works best
locally."
It is also not known whether the bill continues to be opposed by
American Medical Response (AMR), California's largest provider
of 9-1-1 emergency ambulance services and private employer of
paramedics and emergency medical technicians. With respect to
the previous version of the bill, AMR states: "The sponsors of
the bill fail to provide any evidence that the current
appearance of our workforce uniforms or ambulances poses any
threat to patient or public safety. When an AMR crew arrives at
the scene of a medical emergency, it is clear who they work for.
Our logo and name are prominently displayed in multiple
locations on our ambulances. AMR patches are clearly visible on
our crew's uniforms, and the patient ultimately receives a bill
issued by AMR with our phone number and address. We also
receive thousands of letters every year from patients thanking
us for our services which clearly indicates the patient was
aware that the crew treating them was working for AMR. In fact,
the utilization of county patches and identifying marks, which
are used in tandem with AMR patches and logos, provide assurance
to the patient and family that we are responding under the
authority of the county, and are licensed to practice medicine
in their jurisdiction."
Analysis Prepared by : Anthony Lew / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
SB 556
Page 6
FN: 0001929