BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1923
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2001
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Judy Chu, Chair
AB 1923 (Lowenthal) - As Introduced: February 10, 2004
Policy Committee: Labor and
Employment Vote: 8-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires employers of emergency response personnel to
establish, implement, and maintain a critical incident stress
program for the purpose of relieving stress generated by
exposure to a critical incident. The bill defines "critical
incident" as an incident involving mass human casualties,
maiming, or dismemberment, a large life loss incident, a
fatality involving a child, or a fatality or injury involving a
coworker.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)One-time rulemaking costs in the range of $150,000 in 2004-05
to the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board within
the Department of Industrial Relations to establish and adopt
a standard for emergency response personnel critical incident
stress programs.
2)Unknown costs to state and local public safety departments,
probably in excess of $2 million annually statewide, to
develop critical incident stress programs, and to provide the
services prescribed therein. (The bill does not impose a
state-mandated local program because it applies equally to
public and private employers.)
Although the bill does not specify what types of services these
programs would provide, or how they should be paid for,
presumably, the programs would provide psychological
counseling services. Exposure of emergency workers to
"critical incidents" would be a routine occurrence, given the
broad definition of the term. Moreover, the bill does not
AB 1923
Page 2
define "emergency response personnel" (see discussion below).
A broad interpretation of this term could result in a generous
entitlement to psychological counseling services for an array
of public safety personnel.
COMMENTS
1)Background . This bill is co-sponsored by the California
Professional Firefighters (CPF) and the California
Firefighters Association. The author and sponsors are
concerned that there is no program to help reduce the stress
to emergency response personal caused by their exposure to
so-called "critical incidents."
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), a nonprofit
organization dedicated to reducing the burden of fire and
other hazards, defines the objectives of a critical incident
stress program as reducing the impact of a critical incident,
placing it into proper perspective, and maintaining a healthy
outlook. According to NFPA suggested guidelines, a program
should consist of firefighters, support personnel, and mental
health professionals trained in stress related counseling.
2)Problems in Statutory Construction . The program requirement
would be codified in the Occupational Safety and Health
(Cal-OSHA) abatement provisions of the Labor Code, which
require, among other things, that employers correct unsafe and
unhealthy conditions and work practices in a timely manner.
By defining "exposure to a critical incident" as an
"unhealthy condition," this bill literally would require
employers of emergency response personnel to take actions to
ensure that these personnel are not exposed to "critical
incidents." It is of course not reasonable to expect
emergency personnel not to be exposed to the very types of
human trauma that defines their jobs. Yet employers would be
exposed to civil liability if they did not abate this
"unhealthy condition."
The bill, moreover, does not define "emergency response
personnel." A broad interpretation of this term could include
not only emergency medical technicians, but also police and
firefighters.
AB 1923
Page 3
Analysis Prepared by : Stephen Shea / APPR. / (916) 319-2081