BILL NUMBER: SB 1241	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  AUGUST 29, 2016
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  AUGUST 19, 2016
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 20, 2016
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY  JUNE 14, 2016
	AMENDED IN SENATE  APRIL 18, 2016
	AMENDED IN SENATE  MARCH 29, 2016

INTRODUCED BY   Senator Wieckowski

                        FEBRUARY 18, 2016

   An act to add  Section 1799.208 to the Civil Code, and to
add  Section 925 to the Labor Code, relating to 
employment  contracts.



	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 1241, as amended, Wieckowski.  Contracts. 
 Employment contracts: adjudication: choice of law and forum.
 
   Existing law, the Consumer Contract Awareness Act of 1990, defines
a consumer contract as a writing prepared by a seller that provides
for the sale or lease of goods or services or the extension of
credit, as specified, for personal, family, or household purposes,
among other provisions. The act requires a seller, which includes
financial institutions, to deliver a copy of a consumer contract to
the consumer at the time the contract is signed, and it prohibits the
waiver of any provisions of the act.  
   Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of labor
contracts. Existing law prohibits an employer from requiring an
employee or applicant for employment to agree, in writing, to any
term or condition that is known by the employer to be illegal.
Existing law creates the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement,
which is under the direction of the Labor Commissioner, and generally
commits to the commissioner the authority and responsibility for the
enforcement of employment laws. 
   This  bill would prohibit,   bill,  for
contracts entered into, modified, or extended on or after January 1,
2017,  a seller   would prohibit an employer
 from requiring  a consumer, as a condition of entering
into a contract,   an employee who primarily resides and
works in California,   as a condition of employment, 
to agree to a provision that would require the consumer to adjudicate
outside of California a claim arising in California or deprive the
 consumer   employee  of the 
substantive  protection of California law with respect to a
controversy arising in California. The bill would make any 
choice of venue or choice of law  provision  of a
contract that violates these prohibitions  voidable, upon
request of  a consumer who primarily resides in California,
if the provision would violate either of those prohibitions as
provided.   the employee   and would require a
dispute over a voided provision to be adjudicated in California under
California law.  The bill would  make  
specify that  injunctive relief  is  available and
would authorize a court to award  a consumer 
reasonable attorney's fees. The bill would provide that adjudication
includes litigation and arbitration for purposes of these provisions.
 The bill would except from these provisions a contract with an
employee who was represented by legal counsel, as specified. 

   This bill also would create an analogous set of rights,
prohibitions, and requirements, as described above, in connection
with employment contracts for an employee who primarily resides and
works in California. The bill would except from these employment
provisions a contract with an employee who is represented by legal
counsel, as specified, or a talent agency, as defined. 
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
   
  SECTION 1.    Section 1799.208 is added to the
Civil Code, to read:
   1799.208.  (a) A seller shall not require a consumer, as a
condition of entering into a contract, to agree to a provision that
would do either of the following:
   (1) Require the consumer to adjudicate outside of California a
claim arising in California.
   (2) Deprive the consumer of the protection of California law with
respect to a controversy arising in California.
   (b) Notwithstanding any other law, any choice of venue or choice
of law provision is voidable, upon request of a consumer who
primarily resides in California, if the provision would do either of
the following:
   (1) Require the consumer to adjudicate outside of California a
claim arising in California.
   (2) Deprive the consumer of the protection of California law with
respect to a controversy arising in California.
   (c) If a provision is rendered void at the request of the
consumer, as described in subdivision (b), the matter shall be
adjudicated in California and California law shall govern the
dispute.
   (d) In addition to injunctive relief and any other remedies
available, a court may award a consumer who is enforcing his or her
rights under this section reasonable attorney's fees.
   (e) For purposes of this section, adjudication includes litigation
and arbitration.
   (f) This section shall apply to a contract entered into, modified,
or extended on or after January 1, 2017. 
   SEC. 2.   SECTION 1.   Section 925 is
added to the Labor Code, to read:
   925.  (a) An employer shall not require an employee  or
job applicant,   who primarily resides and works in
California,  as a condition of employment, to agree to a
provision that would do either of the following:
   (1) Require the employee to adjudicate outside of California a
claim arising in California.
   (2) Deprive the employee of the  substantive  protection
of California law with respect to a controversy arising in
California. 
   (b) Notwithstanding any other law, any choice of venue or choice
of law provision is voidable, upon request of an employee who
primarily resides and works in California, if the provision would do
either of the following:  
   (1) Require the employee to adjudicate outside of California a
claim arising in California.  
   (2) Deprive the employee of the protection of California law with
respect to a controversy arising in California.  
   (c) If a provision is rendered void at the request of the
employee, as described in subdivision (b), the matter shall be
adjudicated in California and California law shall govern the
dispute.  
   (b) Any provision of a contract that violates subdivision (a) is
voidable by the employee, and if a provision is rendered void at the
request of the employee, the matter shall be adjudicated in
California and California law shall govern the dispute. 

   (d) 
    (c)  In addition to injunctive relief and any other
remedies available, a court may award an employee who is enforcing
his or her rights under this section reasonable attorney's fees.

   (e) 
    (d)  For purposes of this section, adjudication includes
litigation and arbitration. 
   (f) 
    (e)  This section shall not apply to a contract with an
employee who is in fact individually represented by legal counsel in
negotiating the terms of an agreement to designate either the venue
or forum in which a controversy arising from the employment contract
may be adjudicated or the choice of law to be applied. 
   (g) This section shall not apply to a contract for which the
employee was represented by a talent agency, as defined in
subdivision (a) of Section 1700.4.  
   (h) 
    (   f)  This section shall apply to a contract
entered into, modified, or extended on or after January 1, 2017.