BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                SB 903
                                                                Page  1

        SENATE THIRD READING
        SB 903 (Wright)
        As Amended  June 7, 2010
        Majority vote 

         SENATE VOTE  :21-10  
         
         LABOR & EMPLOYMENT      5-0     APPROPRIATIONS      12-5        
         
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
        |Ayes:|Swanson, Bill Berryhill,  |Ayes:|Fuentes, Bradford,        |
        |     |Furutani, Monning, Yamada |     |Charles Calderon, Coto,   |
        |     |                          |     |Davis, De Leon, Gatto,    |
        |     |                          |     |Hall, Skinner, Solorio,   |
        |     |                          |     |Torlakson, Torrico        |
        |     |                          |     |                          |
        |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
        |     |                          |Nays:|Conway, Harkey, Miller,   |
        |     |                          |     |Nielsen, Norby            |
        |     |                          |     |                          |
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
         SUMMARY  :   Extends the statute of limitation period, from one year to  
        three years, for collection actions brought by the Division of Labor  
        Standards Enforcement (DLSE). 

         EXISTING LAW  places a one-year statute of limitation for judgments  
        filed on DLSE-imposed fines. 

         FISCAL EFFECT  :   According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee,  
        potential increase in civil penalty revenues, to the extent that the  
        longer period results in collection of additional penalties by DLSE.   
        According to DLSE, there have not been significant lapses in filing  
        penalties, so the additional revenues should be minor.

         COMMENTS  :  According to a report released by the State Controller's  
        Office in 2008 (SCO Report), of the $71.9 million in fines issued  
        from 2004 to 2006, only $17.8 million was collected by the California  
        Department of Industrial Relations (DIR).  The $54.1 million in  
        uncollected fines represent 75.3 percent of the total fines assessed  
        in that two year period.  In October of 2006, DIR established a  
        Collection Unit (Unit) to improve its collection efforts.  DIR's 2009  
        Annual Report on the Effectiveness of Bureau of Filed Enforcement  
        Report notes that the Unit has had some success since its  
        implementation.  The Unit staff processed 3,257 judgments in 2009 and  
        collected $3,064,181 in penalties.  

        The SCO Report recommends that DIR pursue legislation to extend the  






                                                                SB 903
                                                                Page  2

        statute of limitation period for filing a judgment on DLSE-imposed  
        fines. 

        In its support of this measure, the California Rural Legal Assistance  
        Foundation (CRLAF) writes that this bill will enhance the effective  
        collection of civil penalties for labor law violations by DLSE.   
        CRLAF, the California Labor Federation and the California Nurses  
        Association all assert that, if enacted, this measure will conform  
        the statute of limitations period for DLSE penalty collection actions  
        to that which already exists for the Division of Occupational Safety  
        and Health (DOSH) civil penalty collection activity. 

        CRLAF notes that DLSE's collection rate has improved since the  
        release of the SCO Report, but states that in 2009, DLSE issues  
        approximately $16 million dollars less in civil penalty assessments  
        for labor law violations than it did in 2008.  They write that DLSE  
        continues to be under-funded and state that cases will remain open  
        and collection rates will fall after the one-year deadline.  CRLAF  
        believes that it is prudent to equip DLSE with the same collection  
        tools as DOSH has had since 1991. 

         Analysis Prepared by  :     Shannon McKinley / L. & E. / (916)  
        319-2091FN: 0005549