BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1669


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:   April 20, 2016


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                               Lorena Gonzalez, Chair


          AB  
          1669 (Roger Hernández) - As Amended March 8, 2016


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Labor and Employment           |Vote:|5 - 2        |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             | Local Government              |     | 6- 3        |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  YesReimbursable:   
          Yes


          SUMMARY:


          This bill extends an existing bid preference for public transit  
          contractors who agree to retain employees to also include  
          contracts for the collection and transportation of solid waste.








                                                                    AB 1669


                                                                    Page  2







          FISCAL EFFECT:




          Potential GF state reimbursable mandated costs, likely minor, to  
          extend a 10 percent bid preference to solid waste handling and  
          recycling contractors. Existing law authorizes a similar local  
          bid preference for public transit services. No test claims have  
          been filed with the Commission on State Mandates for the public  
          transit bid preference. 


          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose. Current law requires local agencies that put out a  
            bid for public transit services to provide a 10% bidding  
            preference to any bidder who agrees to retain employees of the  
            prior contractor or subcontractor for at least 90 days.  The  
            law does not require a new contractor to retain employees of  
            the prior contractor unless the bid preference is granted, nor  
            does it require a new contractor to pay the same wages or  
            offer the same benefits as the former contractor.  The law,  
            which has been in place since 2003, is intended to provide a  
            measure of job security to transit workers when a local agency  
            changes transit service contracts. 
            This bill, sponsored by the California Teamsters Public  
            Affairs Council, would apply the 10% bid preference to  
            contractors for the collection and transportation of solid  
            waste.  This bill would apply to any local government agency,  
            including any city, county, special district, transit  
            district, joint powers authority, or nonprofit corporation  
            that awards or otherwise enters into contracts for the  
            collection and transportation of solid waste in California.   
            This bill is sponsored by the California Teamsters Public  
            Affairs Council.








                                                                    AB 1669


                                                                    Page  3







            


          2)Prior related legislation. This bill is similar to AB 508  
            (Swanson) from 2011.  AB 508 was referred to, but never heard,  
            in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
          


          3)Support. According to the sponsor, when cities and counties  
            contract for services like solid waste disposal, they are  
            often focused on the costs of the bids, the level of service  
            provided, and the type of diversion offered.  In many cases,  
            the workers fall through the cracks and are laid off or  
            replaced when a new contract is put in place. This bill  
            rewards companies who retain existing solid waste service  
            employees for ninety days after the new contract takes effect  
            with a 10% bid preference. This allows the company an  
            opportunity to decide whether to retain the employee, while  
            giving the employee additional time to prepare for a possible  
            layoff job.   Existing law already provides such a preference  
            in bids for transit services. 



          4)Opposition. The Solid Waste Association of North America is  
            opposed to this bill. According to the opposition, local  
            governments should have authority over contracting and  
            employment decisions to provide the most cost effective  
            services. Preference for one contractor or subcontractor over  
            another should not be pre-determined by a requirement that may  
            be inappropriate based on unique contracting, staffing, and  
            economic circumstances that local governments may face.   
            Bidders have the option to retain previous employees and local  
            governments already have the right to put such terms in  
            procurement documents to meet local needs.
          Analysis Prepared by:Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916)  








                                                                    AB 1669


                                                                    Page  4





          319-2081