BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2389
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 16, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2389 (Bonnie Lowenthal) - As Amended: April 24, 2012
Policy Committee: Business and
Professions Vote: 7 - 1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill prohibits a subcontractor entering a personal
residence or place of lodging from wearing a uniform that bears,
or driving a vehicle that bears, a contractor's name or logo,
unless that vehicle or uniform clearly bears the subcontractor's
name and other required information. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits a subcontractor entering a personal residence or
place of lodging from wearing a uniform that bears, or driving
a vehicle that bears, a contractor's name or logo, unless:
a) The uniform or vehicle state the subcontractor's name
and that it is providing services on behalf of the
contracting entity.
b) The information is displayed in a conspicuous place, in
sharp contrast to the background, and in such a way that
the size, shape, and color is ready visible.
2)Authorizes the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) to impose
a $250 fine per day for each violation until the uniform or
vehicle is compliant with this bill.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)On-going costs for the Contractors State License Board and the
Bureau of Security and Investigative Services, the two
licensing categories under DCA that might be affected by this
bill, would be minor and absorbable within existing resources.
AB 2389
Page 2
2)The majority of businesses likely affected by this bill,
emergency responders, cable companies, telephone companies,
and cleaning companies, for example, are not licensed by DCA
and are therefore not under their jurisdiction.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . The intent of this legislation is to make sure
consumers know whether they are dealing with the employee of a
particular company, or with a subcontractor, who may or may
not be trained by, accountable to, or indemnified by the
company the consumer is doing business with.
This bill specifically requires that a uniform or vehicle
clearly identify the name of the subcontractor and the company
they are providing services for.
The California Professional Firefighters Association (CPFA),
sponsors of the legislation, note "AB 2389 will provide
California consumers a clear picture of the relationship
between the worker who shows up at the front door and the
company that sent them there."
As an example, CPFA points to cable companies that use
subcontractors to install their equipment or go door to door
to sell cable packages. Oftentimes, those subcontractors
simply wear uniforms depicting the name of the cable company
and nothing that indicates they are not actually employed by
that company. As another example, CPFA, notes that local
jurisdictions often subcontract out their emergency medical
response services and often it is not clear whether the person
responding to a medical aid call at a home is an actual
firefighter employed by the city or a private subcontractor.
This bill would require that distinction to be made on the
uniforms of the subcontractor.
2)Would this bill be effective ? DCA does not have jurisdiction
over the majority of subcontractors who would theoretically be
affected by this legislation. Therefore, they would not be
able to impose fines for violations of the provisions of this
bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Julie Salley-Gray / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 2389
Page 3