BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1121
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1121 (Florez)
As Introduced February 18, 2010
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :23-12
LABOR & EMPLOYMENT 4-1
--------------------------------
|Ayes:|Swanson, Furutani, |
| |Monning, Yamada |
| | |
|-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Bill Berryhill |
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Deletes the overtime pay and meal period exemptions
for agricultural workers. Specifically, this bill deletes the
provision of the Labor Code that exempts agricultural employees
from the following:
1)Overtime compensation when an individual works in excess of
eight hours in one workday or work in excess of 40 hours in
any one workweek:
2)A mandatory 30 minute meal break before the start of the fifth
hour of work, unless the work period is no more than six hours
and both the employer and the employee choose to waive the
meal period by mutual consent.
3)A second mandatory 30 minute meal break after ten hours of
work that can be waived by the mutual consent of the employer
and employee, if the work period is no more than 12 hours, and
the first meal period was not waived.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW :
1)Establishes the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which sets
minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and youth
employment standards affecting full-time and part-time workers
in the private sector and federal, state and local
governments.
SB 1121
Page 2
a) Exempts, from minimum wage and overtime pay
requirements, farm workers employed by anyone who used no
more than 500 "man-days" of farm labor in any calendar
quarter of the preceding calendar year.
b) Exempts farm workers from overtime pay.
2)Establishes the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker
Protection Act to protect migrant and seasonal agricultural
workers in their interactions with farm labor contractors,
agricultural employers, agricultural associations and
providers of migrant housing.
EXISTING STATE LAW exempts persons employed in an agricultural
occupation, as defined in the Industrial Welfare Commission
Order number 14-80 (Revised), from overtime pay and meal period
requirements.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : In 1941 the state Legislature exempted all
agricultural employees from the statutory requirements of
overtime, in a manner similar to the FLSA. For the succeeding
58 years, this overtime exemption remained largely unchanged
until it was indirectly extended to meal periods in 1999.
According to California's Agricultural Employment, a report
produced by the Employment Development Department (EDD Report)
in 2008, 48.6% of California's agricultural workers reported
annual family income of less than $35,000. One out of every
eight agricultural workers reported annual income of less than
$15,000. In contrast, the EDD Report notes, 21% of
nonagricultural workers reported an annual family income of less
than $35, 000 and only 5.6%, or one in 20, reported annual
family income of less thank $15,000.
In support of the bill, the California Applicants' Attorneys
Association argues that the current exemption from overtime pay
is based on an obsolete 70 year old federal provision. They
assert that this bill is a simple matter of fundamental
fairness. The California Labor Federation writes that
California has long supported its agricultural industry with
considerable public subsides and investment. They assert that
it is time for the State to support the people whose work in the
SB 1121
Page 3
fields makes the California agricultural industry among the
world's most productive and profitable. The California Rural
Legal Assistance Foundation writes that this bill will extend to
farm workers the same overtime protections enjoyed by millions
of other California workers and provide, for the first time,
weekly day of rest requirement. They state that this bill will
bring and end to a sorry chapter of agricultural exceptionalism
in California law as it relates to wage and hour conditions that
affect hundreds of thousands of farm workers.
Opponents note that agriculture is critically affected and
dependent on weather conditions and the seasonality of
agricultural production, and opponents argue that this requires
greater flexibility in scheduling work than other industries,
which is currently reflected in both federal and state labor
laws. Opponents also argue that California already has the
nation's most progressive labor protections for agricultural
production, and that no other state currently requires overtime
once agricultural workers have exceeded the 40 hour work week.
Moreover, opponents argue that due to razor-thin profit margins,
farmers will be forced to cut hours and layoff employees if they
face an increase in labor costs. Opponents believe that this
will hurt the California economy, as agriculture has aided the
state's recovery during the current economic downturn, as well
as place the state's agricultural industry at a competitive
disadvantage.
Analysis Prepared by : Shannon McKinley / L. & E. / (916)
319-2091
FN: 0005027