BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2055|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2055
Author: De La Torre (D)
Amended: 8/16/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE LABOR & INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMM : 4-1, 6/23/10
AYES: DeSaulnier, Ducheny, Leno, Yee
NOES: Hollingsworth
NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 8-1, 8/2/10
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Ashburn, Corbett, Leno, Price, Wolk,
Yee
NOES: Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Emmerson, Walters
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-26, 6/2/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Unemployment insurance: benefits:
eligibility: reserve
accounts: domestic partners
SOURCE : Equality California
DIGEST : This bill permits the Employment Development
Department to award Unemployment Insurance benefits to a
person for whom a registered domestic partnership is
imminent, and must move due to a partner's relocation.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/16/10 add double-jointing
CONTINUED
AB 2055
Page
2
language to avoid conflicts with AB 2364 (Nava).
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Disqualifies a person for unemployment insurance (UI)
benefits if the Director of the Employment Development
(EDD) finds that he or she left his or her most recent
work voluntarily without good cause or that he or she has
been discharged for misconduct.
2.Provides that a person may be deemed to have left his or
her most recent work with good cause if he or she leaves
employment to accompany his or her spouse or domestic
partner to a place from which it is impractical to
commute to the employment.
3.Permits an employer who is entitled to receive notice
that a person has filed a claim of regular UI benefits or
extended UI benefits to submit to EDD facts disclosing
that the claimant left employment voluntarily or left due
to specified circumstances. One of the circumstances is
that the claimant left employment to accompany his or her
spouse or domestic partner to join him at a place from
which it is impractical to commute to the employment, to
which a transfer of the claimant by the employer is not
available.
4.Provides that if a UI claimant left their employment
voluntarily or under specified circumstances, then the
benefits paid to the claimant shall not be charged to the
account of the employer. One of these circumstances is
that the claimant left the employer's employ to accompany
his or her spouse or domestic partner to join him at
place from which it is impractical to commute.
5.Defines "spouse" for the above purposes to include a
person to whom marriage is imminent.
This bill:
1.Defines "domestic partner" to include a person to whom a
registered domestic partnership is imminent;
2.Allows a person to whom a domestic partnership is
CONTINUED
AB 2055
Page
3
imminent to be eligible to receive UI benefits if he or
she accompanies their intended domestic partner to a
place from which it is impractical to commute.
3.Permits an employer to submit facts to EDD disclosing
that the UI claimant left employment to accompany his or
her imminent domestic partner to join him or her at a
place from which it is impractical to commute.
4.Provides that an employer's account will not be charged
for the UI benefits received by a former employee if the
UI claimant left employment to accompany his or her
imminent domestic partner to join him or her at place
from which it is impractical to commute.
Prior Legislation
AB 25 (Migden) Chapter 893, Statutes of 2001, authorizes
the establishment of registered domestic partnerships and
provides that a domestic partner is equal to a spouse for
purposes of UI eligibility and may leave his or her
employment if he or she leaves to accompany or join the
domestic partner to a place from which it is impractical to
commute. AB 25 also allows an individual employer's
account to not be charged when an employee leaves due to
this reason. This bill passed the Senate Floor (23-11) on
9/10/01.
AB 3602 (Waters), Chapter 781, Statutes of 1988, provides
that an individual may be deemed to have left his or her
most recent work with good cause if he or she leaves to
accompany or join his or her spouse or "imminent" spouse
to a place from which it is impractical to commute to the
employment.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
Domestic partner eligibility minor, absorbable costs
CONTINUED
AB 2055
Page
4
annually Special*
*Unemployment Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/4/10)
Equality California (source)
American Civil Liberties Union
California Communities United Institute
California Labor Federation
California Teachers Association
City of West Hollywood
Consumer Attorneys of California
National Center for Lesbian Rights
Sacramento Lawyers for the Equality of Gays and Lesbians
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents argue that this bill
will preserve the family unit by providing the same UI
benefits to imminent domestic partners that married
couples, registered domestic partners, and soon-to-be
married couples currently receive. By guaranteeing this
right to imminent domestic partners, this bill will bring
parity to the law, family unity will be preserved, and all
committed relationships will be given equal opportunity to
unemployment benefits. Proponents also note that in
California's current economic crisis, with unemployment at
12.6%, people are searching for jobs in every corner of the
state and are more willing than ever to move for work.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Carter, Chesbro,
Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, Eng, Evans, Feuer,
Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Hall, Hayashi,
Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jones, Bonnie Lowenthal,
Ma, Mendoza, Monning, Nava, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson,
Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Yamada, John A. Perez
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Blakeslee, Conway,
Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Garrick, Gilmore,
Hagman, Harkey, Jeffries, Knight, Logue, Miller,
Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, Silva, Smyth, Tran,
Villines
CONTINUED
AB 2055
Page
5
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Charles Calderon,
Fletcher, Lieu, Audra Strickland, Vacancy
PQ:nl 8/17/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED