BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1926
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
1926 (Cooper)
As Amended August 17, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |60-15 |(May 19, 2016) |SENATE: |26-12 |(August 22, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: L. & E.
SUMMARY: Provides that certain time spent by apprentices on
public works projects shall be paid at prevailing wage rates.
The Senate amendments:
1)Specify that travel time "to and from the required activity,
if any" shall be paid as time spent on the required activity.
2)Provide that, unless otherwise provided by a collective
bargaining agreement, a contractor is not required to
compensate an apprentice for the time spent on preemployment
activities if the apprentice is required to take a
preemployment drug or alcohol test and he or she fails to pass
that test.
AB 1926
Page 2
3)Make other technical changes.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires that, except as specified, not less than the general
prevailing rate of per diem wages be paid to workers employed
on public works projects.
2)Provides that an apprentice employed upon public works is
required to be paid the prevailing rate of per diem wages for
apprentices in the trade to which he or she is registered and
to be employed only at the work of the craft or trade to which
he or she is registered, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS: This bill provides that certain time spent by
apprentices on public works projects shall be paid at prevailing
wage rates. According to the author, this bill will help
apprentices continue with their apprenticeship training program
by ensuring they receive fair compensation when dispatched to a
construction site ready and prepared to work, complete certain
pre-employment requirements at the request of the contractor,
but are not hired by the contractor for that project.
The author and sponsor argue that an apprentice is completely
responsible to arrive on time and ready for work. Apprentices
and construction workers are always required to travel to where
the work is. However, when an apprentice is dispatched, but not
put to work they lose out on an entire day's wages and miss the
opportunity to learn new skills to advance in their training.
Therefore, this bill provides apprentices dispatched to
contractors with their properly owed prevailing wage rate in the
event a contractor does not use the apprentice for construction
AB 1926
Page 3
work, but requires the apprentice to undergo testing, added
safety training, or any other pre-employment requirements. The
apprentice would receive payment only for the time spent on the
required activity.
Opponents argue that mandating payment of wages before a hiring
decision is made seems contrary to most usual interpretations of
an employment relationship. A contractor requests apprentices
to satisfy the requirements of prevailing wage law but for a
number of possible reasons, the contractor may ultimately choose
not to use the apprentice or may not even be lawfully able to
employ the apprentice.
Analysis Prepared by:
Ben Ebbink / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091 FN:
0004423