BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1235
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 28, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 1235 (Hayashi) - As Amended: May 18, 2009
Policy Committee: Labor and
Employment Vote: N/A
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes, for registered security officers employed
by registered private patrol operators, a collective bargaining
agreement to include an exemption from meal period requirements
of existing law. The bill also specifies:
1)That in order to receive this exemption, the agreement provide
for the wages, hours of work, and working conditions of
employees, include rest periods for the employees, final and
binding arbitration of disputes concerning application of its
rest period provisions, premium wage rates for all overtime
hours worked, and regular hourly pay at least 30% more than
the state minimum wage.
2)That the exemption for these two industries does not affect
the nature or scope of the law related to meal periods for
employers not specifically covered by this measure.
FISCAL EFFECT
Potential minor decrease in costs to Division of Labor
Enforcement (DLSE) within the Department of Industrial Relations
(DIR) related to fewer enforcement investigations.
COMMENTS
1)Background . Current law prohibits an employer from employing
any person for a work period of more than five hours without
providing a meal period of at least 30 minutes. If the total
work period per day for the employee is no more than six
hours, the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of the
AB 1235
Page 2
employee and employer. The meal period is generally unpaid as
long as the employee is relieved of all duty, while rest
periods are considered as "hours worked" and must be
compensated at the employee's regular pay rate.
Current law authorizes paid on-duty meal periods when the
nature of the work prevents an employee from being relieved of
all duty, the parties have agreed to the paid on-duty meal
period in writing, and the written agreement authorizes the
employee to revoke the agreement at any time. If an employer
fails to provide a meal period or rest period, the employer
must pay the employee one additional hour of pay at the
employee's regular rate of compensation for each work day that
the meal or rest period is not provided.
2)Purpose . This bill is supported by the California Association
of Licensed Security Agencies, Guards and Associates
(CALSAGA), who contend that nature of contract private
security work makes it difficult for an employee to leave his
or her post unattended, since security officers are dispersed
throughout many sites, and it is difficult to designate proper
coverage. Service Employees International Union (SEIU) also
supports this bill, stating that their members prefer on-duty
meals and an eight hour shift to the standard eight hour
workday and one-half hour unpaid lunch break.
3)Opposition . Various employer groups object to industry
carve-outs, and contend that the meal period flexibility
should be broadened to include all industries. The California
Nurses Association asserts that the exemption weakens meal and
rest break provisions, which are important to workers' health
and productivity.
4)Related legislation . AB 569 (Emmerson) provides similar
exemptions for employees covered by collective bargaining
agreements in the construction and transportation industries.
Analysis Prepared by : Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081