BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1042
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 5, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
Susan Bonilla, Chair
AB 1042
(Cooper) - As Amended April 20, 2015
SUBJECT: Proprietary security services.
SUMMARY: Expands the definition of a proprietary private
security officer to include a person who may wear distinct
clothing identifying himself or herself as "security," or who
may interact with the public, as specified.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Establishes the Proprietary Security Services Act (Act) and
requires the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services
(BSIS), within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), to
license and regulate proprietary private security employers
(PPSEs) and proprietary private security officers (PPSOs).
(Business and Professions Code (BPC) Section 7574 et seq.)
2)Defines a PPSE as, "a person who has one or more employees who
provide security services for the employer and only for the
employer. A person who employs proprietary private security
officers pursuant to this chapter at more than one location
shall be considered a single employer." (BPC Section
7574.01(e))
AB 1042
Page 2
3)Defines a PPSO as, "an unarmed individual who is employed
exclusively by any one employer whose primary duty is to
provide security services for his or her employer, whose
services are not contracted to any other entity or person, and
who is not exempt pursuant to Section 7582.2, and who meets
both of the following criteria:
a) Is required to wear a distinctive uniform clearly
identifying the individual as a security officer; and,
b) Is likely to interact with the public while performing
his or her duties." (BPC Section 7574.01(f))
THIS BILL:
4) Defines a proprietary security guard as someone who meets
either of the following criteria:
a) He or she may wear a distinctive uniform or marked shirt
or jacket clearly identifying the individual as a security
officer; or,
b) He or she may interact with the public while performing
his or her duties, including controlling access to employer
sites or facilities through the admittance process,
assisting visitors with a legitimate need to enter the
facility, screening visitors and employees to expedite
their admittance to the site or facility, escorting
visitors in a facility, acting to prevent unapproved or
unlawful entry, directing persons causing a disturbance to
leave the facility, ensuring that persons removing property
from the facility are acting within appropriate policy
requirements, observing and reporting incidents or
suspicious activity to management and to public safety
authorities as appropriate, and responding to or reporting
incidents of fire, medical emergency, hazardous materials,
and other incidents or conditions following procedures
AB 1042
Page 3
established by the employer.
FISCAL EFFECT: None. This bill is keyed nonfiscal by the
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the California Association
of Licensed Security Agencies, Guards and Associates.
According to the author, "AB 1042 updates the definition of a
Proprietary Private Security Officer to ensure individuals
providing security services are subject to a background check
and receive appropriate training."
Background. There are two different categories of security
guards regulated by the BSIS: 1) those who work in-house for
a specific employer, PPSOs, and 2) those who are employed by a
contract security firm to provide security services for a
third party, security guards.
A security guard protects persons or property and prevents theft
on premised owned or controlled by the customer of the private
patrol operator, the contract security firm, or by the guard's
employer or in the company of persons being protected.
Security guards must be at least 18 years old, undergo a
criminal history background check through the California
Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), and complete a 40-hour course of required
training. The training and exam may be administered by any
private patrol operator or by a certified training facility.
A PPSO, on the other hand, is someone who is unarmed, employed
only by a single employer, and whose primary duty is to
AB 1042
Page 4
provide security services for his or her employer, a PPSE. A
PPSO must also meet the following criteria: 1) he or she must
wear a distinctive uniform clearly identifying the individual
as a security officer, and 2) he or she must be likely to
interact with the public while performing his or her duties.
Similar to security guards, applicants for PPSO registration
must be at least 18 years old and undergo a criminal history
background check through the DOJ and the FBI. Once
registered, PPSOs are required to carry a valid and current
PPSO registration card, or a hard copy printout of the BSIS's
approval. PPSOs are also required to complete 16 hours of
training in security officer skills within six months from the
date upon which registration is issued, or within six months
of his or her employment with a PPSE. A PPSE is required to
annually provide each employee with specifically dedicated
review or practice of security officer skills, as specified,
and to maintain records verifying completion of the review or
practice training, and records of employment for PPSOs. PPSEs
are prohibited from subletting PPSOs to another person,
business, or entity.
Persons exempt from registration requirements as a PPSO or a
PPSE include an officer or employee of the US, or of this
state or a political subdivision of the state; a charitable
philanthropic nonprofit society or association incorporated
under the laws of the state; patrol special police officers;
and a peace officer or retired peace officer, as specified.
According to the 2014 BSIS Sunset Review Report, in fiscal year
2013/14, there were roughly 594 PPSEs, and 6,201 PPSOs.
Need for the Bill. According to the author, the current
definition of PPSO is too narrow and should include persons
not wearing a uniform, but who act primarily in a security
capacity, such as a bouncer at a bar or restaurant. For
example, a San Diego affiliate of NBC News reported on
AB 1042
Page 5
February 10, 2015, that there was an "underground industry" of
unlicensed, untrained security guards and bouncers in San
Diego County, and that many of the security officers were not
licensed properly. According to a DCA spokesman quoted in the
story, "?for proprietary security guards, the ones that work
for restaurants and bars and those sorts of things, unlicensed
activity can be a vexing problem because not every bar that
springs up is aware of the licensing requirement?It's not so
much underground as they are unaware."
The DCA spokesman also noted another issue relating to these
unlicensed security personnel, which is that the security
officer only needs to be licensed if the employee is wearing
clothing that identified him or her as security; if the person
is not wearing a uniform, but performing the same duties, no
license is required. As a result, those individuals would not
be required to register with the BSIS, have a background
check, or meet any training requirements.
Current Related Legislation. SB 468 (Hill), of the current
legislative session, would extend the operation of the BSIS
and the Alarm Company Act, Locksmith Act, Private Investigator
Act, Private Security Services Act, Proprietary Security
Services Act, and Collateral Recovery Act until January 1,
2020; subject the Bureau to review by the appropriate
committees of the Legislature; and make various changes to
provisions in the aforementioned Acts to improve the
oversight, enforcement and regulation by the Bureau of
licensees under each Act. STATUS: This bill is in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
Prior Related Legislation. SB 741 (Maldonado), Chapter 361,
Statutes of 2009, revised and recasted the existing regulation
of proprietary private security officers to require both
proprietary private security officers and proprietary private
security employers, as defined, to register with the Bureau of
AB 1042
Page 6
Security and Investigative Services, and establishes training
and enforcement provisions.
SB 666 (Maldonado), Chapter 721, Statutes of 2007, required
PPSOs to complete security officer skills training as they
begin employment and to undergo an annual review of this
training. SB 666 also required the Bureau to establish a
training curriculum by regulation, with the assistance of an
advisory committee.
SB 194 (Maldonado), Chapter 655, Statutes of 2005, enacted the
Act and required a PPSO as defined, to meet specified
requirements and register with the DCA.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:
The California Association of Licensed Security Agencies, Guards
and Associates (CALSAGA), writes in support: "With a strong
commitment from the Legislature over the past few years,
California has made advances in professionalizing private
security by mandating DOJ and FBI background checks prior to
security officers going to work, dramatically increasing the
training requirement for these officers, and requiring private
and proprietary security employers to register with the State.
Current law defines a 'proprietary private security officer' as
an unarmed individual who, among other qualifications, meets 2
specific criteria of being required to: 1) Wear a distinctive
uniform clearly identifying him or her as a security guard and
2) Being likely to interact with the public while performing his
or her duties. This bill would expand the definition of
proprietary private security officer by instead requiring only
one of the 2 specific criteria to be met. The change in
definition would insure that certain individuals that are hired
to interact with the public while performing his or her duties
are property trained and certified to perform those duties.'
AB 1042
Page 7
We believe these changes continue the outstanding and nationally
recognized security guard industry in California by adding
greater public and consumer protection and assisting our state
regulatory agency, the [BSIS] in their effort to curb unlicensed
activity. In furthering these goals, [this bill] would provide
greater consumer protection by ensuring that certain duties,
which at times may involve dangerous situations, are carried out
by licensed and certified professionals."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:
None on file.
AMENDMENTS:
This bill seeks to close a loophole, and promote training and
background checks for persons performing security functions by
no longer requiring PPSOs to wear a uniform to fall under the
BSIS's jurisdiction, and instead defining a PPSO as someone who
either 1) may wear a distinctive uniform or marked shirt or
jacket identifying the individual as security, or 2) may
interact with the public while performing his or her duties,
including "controlling access to employer sites or facilities
through the admittance process, assisting visitors with a
legitimate need to enter the facility, screening visitors and
employees to expedite their admittance to the site or facility,
escorting visitors in a facility, acting to prevent unapproved
or unlawful entry, directing persons causing a disturbance to
leave the facility, ensuring that persons removing property from
the facility are acting within appropriate policy requirements,
observing and reporting incidents or suspicious activity to
management and to public safety authorities as appropriate, and
responding to or reporting incidents of fire, medical emergency,
AB 1042
Page 8
hazardous materials, and other incidents or conditions following
procedures established by the employer."
While the prior definition may have been too narrow, the
proposed definition might be too broad. As a result, the author
should consider amending paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision
(f) of Section 7574.01 as follows:
(1) He or she may Is required to wear a distinctive uniform
or marked shirt or jacket clearly identifying the individual
as a security officer.
(2) He or she may Is likely to interact with the public while
performing his or her duties. duties, providing security
services, which may include: including controlling access to
employer sites or facilities through the admittance process,
assisting visitors with a legitimate need to enter the
facility, screening visitors and employees to expedite their
admittance to the site or facility, escorting visitors in a
facility, acting to prevent unapproved or unlawful entry,
directing persons causing a disturbance to leave the facility,
ensuring that persons removing property from the facility are
acting within appropriate policy requirements, observing and
reporting incidents or suspicious activity to management and
to public safety authorities as appropriate, and responding to
or reporting incidents of fire, medical emergency, hazardous
materials, and other incidents or conditions following
procedures established by the employer.
REGISTERED SUPPORT:
California Association of Licensed Security Agencies, Guards and
Associates
AB 1042
Page 9
REGISTERED OPPOSITION:
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by:Eunie Linden / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301