BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 804|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 804
Author: Roger Hernández (D)
Amended: 3/23/15 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE BUS, PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE: 7-2, 6/8/15
AYES: Hill, Block, Galgiani, Hernandez, Jackson, Mendoza,
Wieckowski
NOES: Bates, Berryhill
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-1, 6/22/15
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza
NOES: Bates
NO VOTE RECORDED: Nielsen
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 4/23/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Shorthand reporters: continuing education
requirements
SOURCE: California Court Reporters Association
Deposition Reporters Association of California
DIGEST: This bill requires the Court Reporters Board of
California to adopt regulations establishing minimum continuing
education requirements as a condition for renewal of a court
reporters certificate and to establish a procedure for approving
providers of continuing education courses.
ANALYSIS:
AB 804
Page 2
Existing law:
1)Provides for the certification and regulation of short hand
reporters and for the regulation of shorthand reporting
corporations by the Court Reporters Board (CRB) within the
Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA). (Business and
Professions Code (BPC) § 8000 et seq.)
2)Provides that a certified shorthand reporter (CSR) certificate
is valid for one year, and may be renewed by applying for the
certificate renewal, paying the renewal fee, and notifying the
CRB of any substantially related criminal convictions or of
any disciplinary action taken by any regulatory agency against
the licensee. (BPC § 8024)
3)Establishes the fees the CRB may charge, including fees for
examinations, initial and renewal CSR certificates. (BPC §
8031)
4)Authorizes the CRB to investigate complaints against
licensees. (BPC § 8008)
5)Authorizes the CRB to suspend, revoke, or deny a certificate,
or take other disciplinary action for negligence,
incompetence, and unprofessional conduct. (BPC § 8025)
6)Authorizes the CRB to issue administrative citations and
assess fines for violations of the rules and regulations
pertaining to CSRs. (BPC § 8027.5)
7)Requires the Director of the DCA, by regulation, to develop
guidelines to prescribe components for mandatory continuing
education (CE) programs administered by the DCA boards and
bureaus to ensure that mandatory CE is used as a means to
create a more competent licensing population, thereby
enhancing public protection and specifies what the guidelines
shall require in terms of providing CE programs. (BPC § 166)
This bill:
1)Requires the CRB to adopt regulations that establish minimum
CE requirements for renewal of a CSR certificate by July 1,
2016.
AB 804
Page 3
2)Requires certificate holders, six months after the effective
date of the regulations, to certify completion of minimum CE
requirements to the CRB when renewing a certificate.
3)Requires the CRB to ensure that the CE requirement is relevant
to the practice of shorthand reporting.
4)Requires the CRB to establish a procedure for approving CE
course providers, and requires CE providers to comply with
procedures established by the CRB.
5)Permits the CRB to revoke or deny the right of a CE provider
for failure to comply with requirements or regulations as
specified.
6)Authorizes the CRB to establish exceptions to the CE
requirements for individuals who cannot meet the CE
requirements for reasons of health, military service, or undue
hardship.
7)Requires that the CE requirements comply with the guidelines
for mandatory CE established by the DCA.
8)Authorizes the CRB to adopt regulations to implement the above
provisions.
9)Authorizes the CRB to establish a $40 fee for the approval of
CE providers.
Background:
1)Judicial Counsel Continuing Education Requirement. In 2007,
the Judicial Counsel of California adopted a CE requirement
for all personnel employed by the Court, including court
reporters (California Rules of Court, Title 10, Division 2,
Chapter 7). It requires court employees to take at least 8
hours of CE every 2 years.
While not specific to court reporting, employees have two
choices for CE: (1) they may choose from approved providers;
or (2) they may choose a course that is relevant to the work
of the courts or the judicial branch, is one hour long, and
has identified anticipated learning outcomes (how new
knowledge, skills, or abilities will be applied, demonstrated,
AB 804
Page 4
or used). The Court's executive officers, managers, and
supervisors must grant employees enough leave to complete the
education, develop educational plans, and ensure proper
reimbursement for travel.
2)Continuing Education for Court Reporters: A Legislative
Sunset Review Issue. The issue of CE was discussed several
times during the CRB's sunset review process. In 1996, the
process covered the pros and cons of CE requirements, but the
CRB deleted a CE proposal from its 1994 legislation when it
learned that the Governor would not approve it.
At that time, the CRB stated that many in the profession
believe that the CRB's pre-license testing system keeps the
standard of entry at an appropriate level, and the intensity
demanded in the day-to-day requirements in the occupation
drives the individual licensees to seek and find the
educational training requirements necessary on their own
initiative. However, others believed that, because the
industry changes quickly, there should be higher standards for
the profession.
In the end, the Joint Committee's recommendation did not
include pursuing CE. The issue was again raised in the
2004-2005 review of the CRB; however, the Joint Oversight
Committee did not recommend establishing a CE requirement.
3)Necessity of CE for CSRs and Consumer Protection. The
Co-Sponsors and Author of this bill note that the difficulty
of the profession, the constant changes in legal terms, and
the steady stream of new and complex technologies increase the
risk of harm to the legal rights of consumers. In addition,
many other states require CSRs to complete CE. Therefore,
they state that the CRB should require CSRs to complete CE.
Further, the CRB has also noted industry changes that may lead
to consumer harm. It noted that the court reporting business
model has changed, which now results in a larger percentage of
independent contractors working for large corporate firms
owned by non-licensees.
In the past, CSRs primarily worked in firms owned by licensees
that strongly encouraged the CSRs to stay current with changes
in technology and litigation support services. Now, however,
CSRs tend to work as independent contractors that are hired by
AB 804
Page 5
large conglomerates. Because the larger conglomerates tend
not to provide as much oversight of CSRs, CSRs working as
independent contractors have less incentive to stay current
with the profession.
However, the CRB does not track the number of CSRs that work
as independent contractors, for firms, or for the courts.
Further, the enforcement data shows that CRB has not received
a particularly high number of consumer complaints. Therefore,
it is not clear what impact this industry change has made.
One answer may be that issues in quality are rectified through
the normal processes-sometimes inaccuracies can be resolved
through the fact checking and proofreading process CSRs go
through before delivering a final product. Without data,
though, there is no clear answer and no issue to rectify.
Nonetheless, imposing CE may be a useful preventive measure,
given the risk to a litigant's legal rights. However, past
analyses have noted a distinction between licensees that
voluntarily seek out CE to better themselves and unwilling
licensees that take CE because it is required. Because CSRs
that consistently produce inaccurate transcripts may be
disciplined by the CRB or have trouble finding work, they
already have reasons to stay up to date with their practice.
Therefore, an additional mandatory requirement may impact
educational outcomes.
There is also an argument that CSRs (and all professions) can
benefit from CE, and there are many professional organizations
in support. For example, there are ethical rules that court
reporters must follow, and CE may strengthen faith in the
profession. Therefore, the benefits to the profession and
consumers will have to be weighed against the costs of a CE
requirement to the consumers, licensees, and the CRB.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
One-time staff costs of $51,000 in 2016-17 and $43,000 in
2017-18 for the CRB to develop and adopt regulations to
AB 804
Page 6
establish continuing education requirements and establish a
process for approving providers of continuing education.
(Court Reporters Fund)
Ongoing staff costs of $21,000 in 2017-18 and $34,000 annually
thereafter to process continuing education documentation from
licensees. (Court Reporters Fund)
Negligible revenue increase to the extent the CRB established
the maximum fee of $40 to approve continuing education
providers. The CRB has only identified eight potential
providers currently offering courses or seminars that would
address the bill's continuing education requirements.
SUPPORT: (Verified6/23/15)
California Court Reporters Association (co-source)
Deposition Reporters Association of California (co-source)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
Northern California Court Reporters Association
Sacramento Official Court Reporters Association
San Diego Superior Court Reporters Association
Service Employees International Union
OPPOSITION: (Verified6/23/15)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The California Court Reporters
Association (Co-Sponsor) writes, "Under current law, there are
no requirements in place to ensure that a CSR is maintaining the
education needed to stay updated on rules, regulations, statutes
AB 804
Page 7
and advancing technologies that affect the profession. While in
many cases, continuing professional development and education is
undertaken voluntarily, some reporters who practice in more
isolated settings may not have access to information related to
advancements or changes in the profession. Consumers of the
products and services, offered by a CSR, expect to receive the
latest available technology, i.e., real-time reporting, Internet
text streaming, transcript repositories, exhibit scanning and
linking to transcripts, and much more. Continuing education
requirements ensure that every CSR can produce a verbatim record
that continues to be held to the highest possible standard."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 4/23/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta,
Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu,
Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo
Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove,
Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer,
Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis,
Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte,
O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone,
Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood,
Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Travis Allen, Campos, Jones, Salas
Prepared by:Mark Mendoza / B., P. & E.D. / (916) 651-1868
6/24/15 18:41:35
**** END ****