BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 350
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 350 (Solorio)
As Amended April 27, 2011
Majority vote
LABOR & EMPLOYMENT 5-1 APPROPRIATIONS 11-6
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Swanson, Alejo, Allen, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Furutani, Yamada | |Bradford, Charles |
| | | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| | | |Gatto, Hall, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Miller |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, Hill, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Expands provisions of existing law that require
janitorial or building maintenance service contractors to retain
employees for 60 days following the awarding of a contract.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Renames the law the "Displaced Property Service Employee
Opportunity Act."
2)Expands the employee retention and related provisions of
existing law applicable to janitorial and building maintenance
service contracts to contracts for "property services."
3)Defines "property services" to include janitorial, building
maintenance, licensed security, landscape, window cleaning, or
food cafeteria and dietary services.
4)Specifies that a person who provides landscape services is
covered only if he or she provides those services for at least
15 hours per week at a single worksite.
5)Specifies that "licensed security" service means service
rendered by a person covered by a valid collective bargaining
agreement.
6)Expands the employee retention provisions from 60 to 90 days.
AB 350
Page 2
7)Specifies that a covered employee must be employed for at
least four months for these provisions to be operative.
EXISTING LAW requires contractors and subcontractors that are
awarded janitorial or building maintenance services contracts to
retain specified employees of the prior contractor for a period
of 60 days.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, potential increased state costs to retain employees
as specified under this bill as the state currently has several
building maintenance contracts.
COMMENTS : Under current law, a successor contractor or
subcontractor providing janitorial or building maintenance
service is required, for a 60-day transition employment period,
to retain employees who have been employed by the terminated
contractor or its subcontractors, if any, for the preceding four
months or longer at the site or sites covered by the successor
service contract. This requirement does not apply if the
successor contractor or successor subcontractor has reasonable
and substantiated cause not to hire a particular employee based
on that employee's performance or conduct while working under
the terminated contract.
These provisions were enacted pursuant to SB 20 (Alarc�n),
Chapter 195, Statutes of 2001.
This bill proposes to amend current law to expand coverage of
these employee retention requirements to other industries.
According to the author, contracted out property service
workers, such as building maintenance, licensed security,
landscape, window cleaning and food cafeteria personnel, can
lose their jobs with little - or no warning - when the property
manager decides to award the service contract to another
contractor. California continues to face record high
unemployment levels, still in excess of 12% in many communities,
and the economy is not expected to rebound for years. Property
service workers who have diligently maintained and secured
business properties should be afforded a measure of job
stability when contractors are changed, through no fault of
their own. Taking into consideration the dire economic
AB 350
Page 3
situation facing California, extending the retention period from
60 to 90 days will allow property service workers to maintain
their jobs for an additional 30 days.
Opponents contend this bill is designed to ensure that a union
who has been elected as the bargaining representative through
the proper procedures for the prior contractor, will remain the
bargaining representative for the subsequent employer. Since
this bill mandates that subsequent employers hire the
predecessor's employees, it would provide automatic protection
to the incumbent union to maintain its status as the bargaining
representative, thus forcing all contractors/employers of
"property services" to be union employers. Opponents believe
the decision of whether or not to have a union in the workplace
should be left to the employers and employees, after following
the proper procedures outlined by the National Labor Relations
Act.
Opponents also argue this bill constitutes a government mandate
that completely usurps the employers' discretion in who to hire
in its workforce and precludes the subsequent employer from
conducting any pre-hiring background checks or interviews to
determine if the employees of the prior contractor/employer are
individuals who meet the unique and specific criteria of the
subsequent employer. This bill basically eliminates any
distinction from one contractor to the next regarding the type
of workforce that contractor can deliver, thereby minimizing
competition amongst contractors. Additionally, by limiting a
subsequent employer's ability to properly conduct background
checks of potential employees, it is setting up these subsequent
employers for potential negligent hiring litigation.
Analysis Prepared by : Ben Ebbink / L. & E. / (916) 319-2091
FN: 0000877