BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1065
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
1065 (Chiu) - As Amended April 15, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Labor and Employment |Vote:|5 - 1 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill specifies it is unlawful employment practice, for
purposes of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), for an
employer to request more or different documents than are
required pursuant to federal law relative to employment
AB 1065
Page 2
verification. Further, this bill makes it unlawful for an
employer to refuse to honor documents tendered that on their
face reasonably appear to be genuine; to discriminate against an
immigrant with authorization to work based upon the specific
status or term of status that accompanies the authorization to
work; or to attempt to reinvestigate or re-verify an incumbent
employee's authorization to work, unless required to do so by
federal law or authority.
FISCAL EFFECT:
General Fund administrative costs to the Department of Fair
Employment and Housing (DFEH), potentially in the range of
$100,000 to $200,000, for staff to investigate and resolve
claims. The volume and nature of the claims will dictate whether
additional staff is needed.
The nature of these claims appears to be outside the current
expertise of DFEH investigators and legal staff. For example,
according to DFEH, significant resources may be needed to
investigate and resolve claims related to the refusal to honor
documents tendered that "on their face reasonably appear to be
genuine". This standard is broad and could present evidentiary
confusion.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. Employers are required by the Immigration Reform and
Control Act (IRCA) to verify the identity and employment
eligibility of their workers. To do this, they must complete
an Employment Eligibility Verification Form, also known as a
"Form I-9," within three business days after an employee is
hired. This process requires employees to present the employer
with any one of many possible combinations of documents that
AB 1065
Page 3
prove that they are authorized to work in the United States.
Document abuse occurs when an employer does not permit a
worker to use any documents that are legally acceptable but,
instead, specifies which documents s/he must use, or requires
more documents than are legally required by the Form I-9.
According to the author, while existing state law prohibits
document abuse if it is retaliatory in nature, there is no
protection against document abuse at the initial point of an
individual's application for employment. The Mexican American
Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) is sponsoring this
bill to assist immigrants who seek to work by prohibiting
employers from requesting extraneous documentation from
potential employees.
2)Prior related legislation.
a) AB 1236 (Fong), Chapter 691, Statutes of 2011, prohibit
state and local entities from requiring an employer, other
than one of those government entities, to use an electronic
employment verification system, including E-Verify, except
when required by federal law or as a condition of receiving
federal funds.
b) AB 263 (Roger Hernández), Chapter 732, Statutes of 2013,
prohibits an employer or any other person or entity from
engaging in unfair immigration-related practices, as
defined, against any person for the purpose of retaliating
against the person for exercising specified rights.
Included within the definition of "unfair immigration
AB 1065
Page 4
related-practices" for retaliation purposes is requesting
more or different documents than are required under federal
law or refusing to honor documents tendered that on their
face that reasonably appear to be genuine. AB 263 also
defined "unfair immigration-related practice" to include
using E-Verify to check the employment authorization status
at a time or in a manner not required under federal law or
authorized under a federal memorandum of understanding.
Finally, AB 263 prohibited an employer from taking adverse
employment action against an employee because the employee
updates or attempts to update his or her personal
information based on a lawful change or name, social
security number or federal employment authorization
document.
Analysis Prepared by:Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916)
319-2081