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