BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2364|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2364
Author: Nava (D)
Amended: 8/12/10 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 : 6-3, 8/2/10
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Corbett, Leno, Wolk, Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Emmerson, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Price, Walters
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-0, 4/22/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Unemployment insurance: benefits: good cause
to leave
work
SOURCE : Employment Development Department
DIGEST : This bill permits the Employment Development
Department to award Unemployment Insurance benefits to
workers who leave their jobs to protect family members from
domestic violence.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/12/10 double-joint this bill
with AB 2055 (De La Torre).
CONTINUED
AB 2364
Page
2
ANALYSIS : Existing federal and state law establishes an
Unemployment Insurance (UI) program that is a federal-state
partnership to provide partial wage replacement benefits to
people who are unemployed through no fault of their own.
Existing federal law in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) provides additional funding
to states for purposes of paying UI benefits and
modernizing UI programs, but conditions that funding on the
adoption by a state of certain requirements, including a
domestic violence "good cause" exception for voluntary
resignations.
Existing state law establishes an "alternative base period"
(ABP) method for calculating eligibility for UI benefits to
which certain claimants are entitled.
Existing state law provides that a person who resigns to
protect himself or herself or his or her children from
domestic violence remains eligible for UI benefits. This
resignation is defined as a "good cause" resignation and is
not charged against the employer's UI account.
Existing state law requires that an un-cashed warrant drawn
from the Unemployment Fund, Unemployment Administration
Fund, or Disability Fund reverts to the fund after three
years.
Existing state law references a "leisure sharing" program
to be administered by the Employment Development Department
(EDD).
This bill:
1. Broadens the definition of a "good cause" exception due
to domestic violence to include a worker who resigns to
protect his or her family from domestic violence.
2. Requires that the EDD notifies a UI claimant of which
method of calculation was used to determine eligibility
for UI benefits.
3. Clarifies that a UI claim may be cancelled if all of the
AB 2364
Page
3
following apply:
A. The individual has not been deemed
ineligible for unemployment compensation benefits;
B. The individual has not been overpaid
unemployment compensation benefits; and
C. The individual has not collected
unemployment compensation benefits.
4. Reduces the time period that an un-cashed warrant drawn
from the Unemployment Fund, Unemployment Administration
Fund, or Disability Fund reverts to the fund to 1 year.
5. Repeals the statutory reference to the "leisure sharing"
program.
Comments
In 2009, Congress passed and President Obama signed the
American Reinvestment and Recovery Act as part of the
larger stimulus package to combat the economic recession.
The ARRA offered states a portion of $7 billion to
modernize their unemployment insurance benefit programs,
but required the states also include certain reforms,
starting with the adoption of an ABP when calculating
benefits. Once the ABP was adopted, the state needed to
adopt two other reforms in order to be eligible for all of
the available UI modernization funds.
Under the ARRA, California is eligible for approximately
$839 million. Since California adopted ABP with the
passage of AB 29 3X (Coto) last year, EDD is focusing on
ensuring that the additional reforms are in place in order
to apply for the ARRA funds by August of 2011. Without
those additional reforms, California will only receive
one-third ($280 million) of available ARRA funds.
The federal Department of Labor (DOL) recently notified EDD
that while California currently has a "good cause"
exception for victims of domestic violence to receive UI
benefits in the event of a voluntary resignation, the
exception is too proscriptive, as the ARRA requires that
the "good cause" exemption extends to, at a minimum, to the
victim's immediate family. This bill would broaden the
AB 2364
Page
4
existing exception in order to meet federal requirements,
ensuring California will receive all available ARRA funds.
This bill also makes minor, technical changes to law in
order to clarify existing law. Those changes include
clarifying the circumstances of when an individual may
withdraw a UI claim; removing reference to the "Leisure
Sharing" program, which hasn't been funded in more than 25
years; and conforming UI Code provisions on the length of
time an un-cashed UI or DI warrant can be outstanding to
Government Code provisions.
"Immediate Family" versus "Family"
As was discussed earlier, the ARRA requires that the
domestic violence "good cause" exemption extend to, at a
minimum, the victim's "immediate family". This would
include the spouse, parents, and minor children only. DOL
circulars suggest that states consider also including other
groups, such as foster children, step children, and
grandparents.
The language in this would extend the domestic violence
"good cause" exemption to a wider group of family members
than is required by federal law. This would include
registered domestic partners, siblings, grandparents,
grandchildren, son or daughter-in-law, step children,
foster children, and any guardian or person with whom the
claimant has assumed reciprocal rights, duties, and
liabilities of a parent-child or grandparent-grandchild
relationship.
Prior Legislation
AB 29 3X (Coto), Chapter 23, Statutes of 2009-10, Third
Extraordinary Session, created the alternative base period
of California's UI program. This bill passed the Senate
Floor on 3/26/09 (31-7).
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: Yes Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
AB 2364
Page
5
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
Expanded definition of minor,
absorbable costs annually Special*
domestic violence for
UI benefits
*Unemployment Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/17/10)
Employment Development Department (source)
American Civil Liberties Union
California Commission on the Status of Women
California Communities United Institute
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing
Committee
National Association of Social Workers - California Chapter
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Supporters note that one of the
main reasons victims stay with or return to abusers is due
to an inability to afford to leave. Supporters further
note that the California family is changing - according to
a 2008 AARP study, 6.2 million multi-generational
households in America, and supporters note that this number
has probably only increased due to the recession.
Supporters argue workers who resign to protect a grandchild
or a parent from an abuser do not lack less of a "good
cause" than workers resigning to protect a child. Finally,
supporters note that, without this legislation, California
stands to lose hundreds of millions of dollars necessary
for the modernization of our UI program.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro,
Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore,
Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes,
Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore,
AB 2364
Page
6
Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Jeffries,
Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello,
Nielsen, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas,
Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra
Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran,
Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Blumenfield, Caballero, Huber, Huffman,
Norby, Vacancy
PQ:nl 8/17/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****