BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 367|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 367
Author: Negrete McLeod (D), et al
Amended: 8/31/09
Vote: 27 - Urgency
PRIOR SENATE VOTES NOT RELEVANT
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 78-0, 9/2/09 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Discrimination
SOURCE : Consumer Attorneys of California
DIGEST : This is a new bill. As it left the Senate, the
author was Senator Harmon and the subject matter dealt with
trusts. These provisions were deleted n the Assembly.
This bill now clarifies discrimination laws regarding
consumer discounts. This bill makes clear that the Unruh
Civil Rights Act does not impose liability when a business
offers or confers a discount or other benefit to a consumer
or prospective consumer because the consumer has suffered
the loss or reduction of employment or reduction of wages.
ANALYSIS : The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides that all
persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and
equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion,
ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition,
marital status, or sexual orientation are entitled to the
full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities,
CONTINUED
SB 367
Page
2
privileges, or services in all business establishments of
every kind whatsoever.
This bill provides that any discount or other benefit
offered to or conferred on a consumer or prospective
consumer by a business because the consumer or prospective
consumer has suffered the loss or reduction of employment
or reduction of wages would not be considered an arbitrary
discrimination in violation of that act.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/3/09)
Consumer Attorneys of California (source)
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
"In the current unprecedented economic climate, many
individuals are seeing reductions in pay or loss of
employment. Some private businesses have generously offered
these individuals discounts for services. It has come to my
attention that some of these businesses have been
threatened with legal action under the Unruh Civil Rights
Act. This is not the type of discrimination that the
legislature intended the Act to protect against. SB 367
would clarify that offering discounts or benefits to
individuals that have seen a reduction or elimination of
employment are not considered arbitrary discrimination
under the Unruh Civil Rights Act."
The California Chamber of Commerce supports the bill to
protect businesses from meritless lawsuits, allowing them
to continue offering discounts and other incentives to
consumers negatively affected by these challenging economic
times without the fear of litigation. "We believe it is
imperative that these businesses are protected from
unwarranted lawsuits brought by lawyers inappropriately
seeking to benefit from the generosity and compassion of
businesses in this economic downturn. This bill will simply
clarify current law, establishing that it is not a
violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act when a business
provides discounts to people who have suffered a loss or
reduction in employment."
SB 367
Page
3
The California Retailers Association (CRA) also supports SB
367, stating that it "seeks to clarify current law
regarding retailers' ability to offer discounts and
specials (i.e. Furlough Friday specials) to customers who
have experienced a loss or reduction in employment. Current
law prohibits discrimination based on a number of factors
and SB 367 states that discounts or promotions offered to
those customers do not constitute discrimination. Given the
tough economic climate, California retailers are looking
for new ways to provide customers with discounts and
incentives and this legislation is needed to protect them
from the threat of frivolous and costly litigation."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield,
Brownley, 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, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva,
Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson,
Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, Bass
NO VOTE RECORDED: Buchanan
RJG:nl 9/3/09 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****