BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1093|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1093
Author: Yamada (D)
Amended: 7/1/09 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE LAB. & INDUS. RELATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-0, 6/25/09
AYES: DeSaulnier, Wyland, Ducheny, Leno, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hollingsworth
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 80-0, 5/28/09 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Workers compensation
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill 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, religious, creed, national origin, sexual
orientation, age, gender, or disability, where the
employee-victim is believed by the third-party to be a
member of one of the protected classes.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1. Establishes a workers' compensation system that provides
benefits to an employee injured at work, irrespective of
CONTINUED
AB 1093
Page
2
fault. This system requires all employers to secure
payment of benefits by either securing the consent of
the Department of Industrial Relations to self insure or
by securing insurance against liability from an
insurance company duly authorized by the state.
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.
3. Requires that no person in the State of California
shall, on the basis of race, national origin, ethnic
group identification, religion, age, sex, sexual
orientation, color, or disability, be unlawfully denied
full and equal access to the benefits of, or be
unlawfully subjected to discrimination under, any
program or activity that is conducted, operated, or
administered by the state or by any state agency, is
funded directly by the state, or receives any financial
assistance from the state.
This bill requires that, for purposes of determining
whether to grant or deny a workers' compensation claim, if
an employee is injured or killed by a 3rd party in the
course of the employee's employment, no personal
relationship or personal connection shall be deemed to
exist if the third-party injured or killed the employee
solely because of the employee's sex, race, color,
religious, creed, age, gender, disability, national origin,
or sexual orientation.
Comments
The main impetus for this bill was the recent case of
Taneka Talley's family and the denial of their workers'
compensation claim. Ms. Talley was murdered in March 2006
by a white supremacist while she was opening a Dollar Tree
store in Fairfield. Dollar Tree's insurer, Specialty Risk
Services, argued that because Ms. Talley's murder was
racially motivated, and therefore personal, despite the
fact she was killed at the Dollar Tree store and would not
have been killed has she not been present at the store.
AB 1093
Page
3
The underlying case law that motivated Dollar Tree was
SCIF v. WCAB (DeVargas) (1982) 133 California Appeal 3d
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.
However, the Court of Appeal found that the racial motive
could cut off the causation between the employment and the
deaths, which at first blush seems to suggest that a
racially motivated killing could be considered personal,
and therefore non-compensable. While the prior personal,
non-occupational relationship between the victims and the
perpetrator in DeVargas would seem to suggest that the case
was inapplicable to the Taneka Talley murder or a similar
case, the author's office believes this should be clarified
in statute.
Prior/Related legislation
SB 145 (DeSaulnier), of 2009, which also addresses the
Taneka Talley case, as well as other forms of
discrimination in the delivery of workers' compensation
benefits.
SB 1115 (Migden) of 2008 would have barred the
consideration of race, national origin, gender, sex,
genetic predisposition, and certain other factors in the
determination of an apportionment of the causes of an
industrial disability. It was vetoed by the Governor
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/8/09)
California Applicants' Attorneys Association
AB 1093
Page
4
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing
Committee
California State Employees Association
Glendale City Employees Association
Organization of SMUD Employees
San Bernardino Public Employees Association
San Luis Obispo County Employees Association
Santa Rosa City Employees Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents argue that state law
should be made abundantly clear that a workplace death like
Taneka Talley's is a compensable claim. Proponents note
that while Ms. Talley's family was eventually paid death
benefits, this was only after significant public pressure
was placed on Dollar Tree and its insurance carrier, and
there is no reason that a family should rely on public
shame to receive these benefits.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeVore, Duvall, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher,
Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani,
Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi,
Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight,
Krekorian, Lieu, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza,
Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, John A.
Perez, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Price, Ruskin, Salas,
Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra
Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran,
Villines, Yamada, Bass
AGB:do 7/8/09 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****