BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1093
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 6, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON INSURANCE
Joe Coto, Chair
AB 1093 (Yamada) - As Amended: April 28, 2009
SUBJECT : Workers' compensation: death benefits
SUMMARY : Provides that a "personal relationship" or "personal
connection" is not established, for purposes of determining a
claim for workers' compensation benefits, based solely on a
third-party aggressor's beliefs regarding sex, race, color,
religion, ancestry, national origin, marital status, or sexual
orientation where the employee-victim is believed by the
third-party to be a member of one of the protected classes.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides for a comprehensive system of workers' compensation
benefits for employees who suffer injuries or illnesses during
the course and scope of employment. These benefits include
death benefits paid to spouses and other dependents in the
event an employee dies as a result of his or her job, as well
as medical payments for injuries suffered by the employee,
among other benefits.
2)Provides, as a matter of case law, that a death or injury is
not job-related if the employee is killed or injured as a
result of a personal motivation between a third-party
aggressor and the employee-victim.
FISCAL EFFECT : Undetermined.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose . The author introduced this bill in response to a
recent case. An African-American woman was murdered while at
work at a Dollar Tree store by an individual who, it was later
determined during a psychiatric evaluation, went out intending
to kill the first black person he saw. Unfortunately, the
Dollar Tree employee was that person. Dollar Tree defended
the claim for workers' compensation death benefits by relying
on at least one "personal motivation" case that involved an
element of ethnic hatred, but also involved a prior
relationship between the killer and the victim, and the
AB 1093
Page 2
killing only coincidentally occurred on property related to
the victim's job.
Dollar Tree eventually settled this case, but the case presents
the issue of what type of personal motivations qualify to
defeat a claim for workers' compensation benefits. Because
case law was sufficiently vague to cause Dollar Tree to
initially deny the claim, the author believes that clarity in
the law is appropriate.
2)Personal motivation or connection . The principle involved in
this rationale for denial of a workers' compensation claim is
that if the death or assault causing injury is based on some
personal relationship between the victim and attacker, and it
only coincidentally occurs at the place of employment, the
injury or death is not genuinely due to the employment. The
classic example is the domestic violence situation, where a
spouse or significant other tracks down his or her estranged
partner at the workplace and inflicts violence. That the
victim happened to be at work at the time the aggressor found
him or her does not mean that the injuries were in the course
of employment.
The underlying case law that motivated Dollar Tree (SCIF v. WCAB
(DeVargas) (1982) 133 CalApp3d 643) involved the killing of
two Mexican men in the bunkhouse of their employer. The
killer had met the two victims earlier, and discussed a sales
transaction involving the victims' vehicle. While the victims
thought they were arranging a sale, the killer had other
ideas. Boasting to friends about how easy it would be to
"blow away Mexicans," the killer pretended to come to the
victims' bunkhouse to complete the sale. The Court of Appeal
ruled that the deaths were not job related, were based on a
prior relationship with the killer, and only coincidentally
occurred at the employer's bunkhouse.
Dollar Tree initially seized upon the ethnic hatred element of
the SCIF v. WCAB case to argue that its employee was killed by
a person whose motive involved racial hatred. A careful
reading of the case shows it was the prior actual relationship
that led to the killing. Nonetheless, the author argues that
clarification of these issues is appropriate.
3)Bill takes narrow approach . The bill, as recently amended,
takes a narrow approach to resolving the vagueness in the law.
AB 1093
Page 3
The new language provides that a claim shall not be denied
"based only on a determination that the third party injured or
killed the employee solely because of the third party's
beliefs . . . ." Thus, the language allows for an employer to
argue that there was a genuine outside relationship that
caused the injury or death, even if there is some evidence of
motivation based on a protected characteristic. At the same
time, the bill ensures that a truly random hate crime such as
the Dollar Tree case is compensable. Thus the bill takes away
any motivation an employer might have to rely on the vagueness
of prior case law.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Applicants' Attorneys Association
California Nurses Association
California State Employees Association (CSEA)
Glendale City Employees Association
Organization of SMUD Employees
San Bernardino Public Employees Association
San Luis Obispo County Employees Association
Santa Rosa City Employees Association
Opposition
California Association of Joint Powers Authorities (CAJPA)
Analysis Prepared by : Mark Rakich / INS. / (916) 319-2086