BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1881|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1881
Author: Monning (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE LAB. & INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE : 4-0, 6/9/10
AYES: DeSaulnier, Ducheny, Leno, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland, Hollingsworth
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-27, 5/13/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Recovery of wages: liquidated damages
SOURCE : California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
DIGEST : This bill increases the amount of liquidated
damages that may be awarded to an employee to twice the
amount of the wages unlawfully unpaid, plus interest.
ANALYSIS : Under existing law, in a court action to
recover wages unpaid in violation of the minimum wage set
by the Industrial Welfare Commission within the Department
of Industrial Relations, the court may award liquidated
damages to an employee equal to the amount of wages
unlawfully unpaid, plus interest.
This bill increases the amount of liquidated damages that
an employee is entitled when recovering wages that were
unlawfully unpaid.
CONTINUED
AB 1881
Page
2
This bill permits an individual to sue his/her employer for
liquidated damages in an amount that is twice the amount of
the wages unlawfully unpaid when the employer pays that
individual less than the minimum wage.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/9/10)
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation (source)
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
National Lawyers Guild Labor & Employment Committee
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/9/10)
Association of Health Facilities
California Bankers Association
California Chamber of Commerce California
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Grocers Association
California Independent Grocers Association
Civil Justice Association of California
Construction Employer's Association
Ventura County Agricultural Association
Western Electrical Contractors Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents argue that it will
bring California into the mainstream with other states that
have recently increased damages paid to workers when their
employers cheat them out of the state's respective minimum
wages. They state that this bill is a response to the
chronic underfunding of the Division of Labor Standards
Enforcement (DLSE) which inhibits its ability to detect,
cite and collect civil penalties for minimum wage
violations, particularly in the underground economy. They
assert that DLSE's underfunding also significantly
undercuts its ability to collect unpaid wages.
Proponents also notes that DLSE has fewer authorized
enforcement positions in 2010 than it had in 1980, and has
a demonstrably poor record of either citing minimum wage or
overtime violations, or collection civil penalty
assessments for these violations, both of which undercut
CONTINUED
AB 1881
Page
3
the deterrent effect of the Labor Codes civil penalty
provisions. They argue that there needs to be more done to
increase the effectiveness of both public and private
enforcement of wage violations in California and follow the
lead of ten other states, including New Mexico, Idaho,
Michigan and Maine, that have enacted statutes that provide
for at least the same level of damages in unpaid wages
proposed in this bill.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents of this bill argue
that the mere availability of liquidated damages, and this
bill's attempt to expand them, are unjustified and
oppressive given that apart from liquidated damages,
employers must make the employee whole and pay a
substantial penalty. In addition, the opponents write that
California employers are already subject to an expansive
number of wage and hour laws and regulations and
substantial penalties for each.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez,
Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Monning, Nava, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson,
Torres, Torrico, Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill,
Blakeslee, Conway, Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fletcher,
Fuller, Gaines, Garrick, Gilmore, Harkey, Jeffries,
Knight, Logue, Miller, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby,
Silva, Smyth, Audra Strickland, Tran
NO VOTE RECORDED: Caballero, Galgiani, Hagman, Skinner,
Vacancy
PQ:do 6/10/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED