BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
Ted W. Lieu, Chair
Date of Hearing: March 9, 2011 2009-2010 Regular
Session
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Fiscal:Yes
Urgency: No
Bill No: SB 56
Author: Corbett
Version: As Introduced December 21, 2010
SUBJECT
Apprenticeship oversight.
KEY ISSUE
Should the Legislature change the approval and auditing
procedures for the state's apprenticeship programs, as well as
the membership requirements of the California Apprenticeship
Council?
PURPOSE
To streamline auditing requirements and limit duplicative
organizational membership on the California Apprenticeship
Council.
ANALYSIS
Existing law provides a framework for promoting and developing
apprenticeship training through the California Apprenticeship
Council (CAC) and the Division of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS)
within the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). DAS
enforces apprenticeship standards for, among other things,
working conditions, classroom instruction and the specific
skills required for state certification as a journeyperson in an
apprentice occupation.
Existing law requires that all apprenticeship programs be
approved by the Chief of the Division of Apprenticeship
Standards. Existing law empowers the Chief to approve
apprenticeship programs in any trade anywhere in the state,
including cities and trade areas, if the apprentice training
needs justify the creation of a program. However, in order for
the Chief to approve an apprenticeship program in the building
and construction trades, any of the following "needs-based"
conditions must be met:
1) There is no existing apprenticeship program serving the
same craft or trade and geographic area;
2) Existing apprenticeship programs that serve the same
craft or trade and geographic area do not have the
capacity, or neglect or refuse, to dispatch sufficient
apprentices to qualified employers at a public works site
who are willing to abide by the applicable apprenticeship
standards;
3) Existing apprenticeship programs approved under this
chapter that serve the same trade and geographic area have
been identified by the California Apprenticeship Council as
deficient in meeting their obligations.
Existing law requires that the California Apprenticeship Council
(CAC) be composed of:
a) Six representatives from employers or employer
organizations, appointed by the Governor, that sponsor
apprenticeship programs;
b) Six representatives from employee organizations,
appointed by the Governor, that sponsor apprenticeship
programs;
c) Two members from the general public, appointed by the
Governor;
d) The Director of the Department of Industrial Relations,
or his or her permanent and best qualified appointee;
e) The Superintendent of Public Instruction, or his or her
permanent and best qualified appointee; and,
f) The Chancellor of the Community Colleges, or his or her
permanent and best qualified appointee.
Hearing Date: March 9, 2011 SB 56
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 2
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
Existing law requires that the Division of Apprenticeship
Standards randomly audit apprenticeship programs every five
years to ensure that:
a) The programs are complying with Division standards;
b) All on-the-job training is supervised by a
journeyperson;
c) All related and supplemental instruction required is
being provided;
d) All work processes are being covered in the program; and
e) The graduates of the program have completed the
apprenticeship program's requirements.
This bill would require that no two representatives of the six
representatives from employee organizations on the California
Apprenticeship Council (CAC) shall be from the same national or
international labor organization.
This bill would require that the following information be
submitted to the Chief of the Division of Apprenticeship
Standards when applying to create a new program or expand an
existing program:
1) A written plan that sets out the number of new
apprentices the applicant seeks to enroll during the next
five years, including the applicant's budget for training
the new apprentices and a detailed explanation of how the
applicant intends to provide sufficient funding to meet
that budget;
2) Evidence that the applicant has obtained sufficient
commitments from employers to employ the new apprentices so
as to ensure, to the extent feasible, that the new
apprentices will be employed continuously throughout the
term of the apprenticeship;
3) Evidence that the applicant has suitable facilities to
train the new apprentices, including a copy of any lease
for those facilities;
4) A plan for the recruitment and selection of new
Hearing Date: March 9, 2011 SB 56
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 3
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
apprentices, including advertising the new apprenticeship
opportunities and outreach to organizations that promote
apprenticeship opportunities to women and underrepresented
minorities.
This bill would remove the requirement of the Division of
Apprenticeship Standards to audit apprenticeship programs every
five years. This bill would create the following new
requirements for audits:
1) During an audit, the Division must attempt to contact a
statistically valid sample of apprentices that failed to
complete the apprentice program to ascertain the reasons
why the apprentices did not complete the program.
2) The Division is required to give priority in conducting
audits to programs that have been identified as having
deficiencies.
3) The Division is required to audit all new or newly
expanded apprenticeship programs one year after the
approval of creating or expanding the program.
4) If the Division finds evidence that the apprenticeship
program has purposefully misstated information to the
Division of Apprenticeship Standards, the Division must
immediately investigate and determine if an audit is
necessary.
5) If the Division determines that a building and
construction trades apprenticeship program has been the
subject of two or more meritorious complaints within a
5-year period, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards
must schedule an audit within three months.
6) If the Division determines that a building and
construction trades apprenticeship program has had at least
two graduating classes with an annual apprentice completion
rate below 50 percent of the average completion rate for an
applicable trade, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards
must schedule an audit within three months.
Hearing Date: March 9, 2011 SB 56
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 4
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
This bill would require that all building and construction
trades apprenticeship programs provide each apprentice with a
semi-annual statement showing the number of hours of on-the-job
and supplemental instruction needed for graduation, and the
apprentice's expected graduation date.
This bill would require that every building and construction
trades apprenticeship program submit to the Division of
Apprenticeship Standards data on apprentice registration, change
of address, graduation, and termination in a monthly statement
in an electronic format acceptable to the Division.
COMMENTS
1. Need for this bill?
As was discussed above, current law requires that the Division
of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS) audit programs every five
years to ensure that state standards are being met and that
the apprentices being trained are being safely and
appropriately trained. However, according to the Division's
most recent report to the Legislature (2007), there were 675
apprenticeship programs, making auditing functions difficult.
For example, the DAS has only listed 49 audits online since
2008, which suggests a large number of programs that either
remain unaudited or without finalized audits. Proponents
argue that the lack of audits and recent reports makes it
difficult to know if apprenticeship programs are meeting
statutorily-set goals.
In place of the current auditing requirements, SB 56 focuses
the auditing requirements on the programs that are new or are
newly expanded, as well as the programs that have low
graduation rates, two or more meritorious complaints, or has
purposefully misstated information to DAS. The author and
sponsor of the bill believe that this will streamline and
target the auditing procedures, going after the new programs
and the poorly performing programs, rather than auditing
everyone over a five year period.
SB 56 requires a written report where the programs to state
Hearing Date: March 9, 2011 SB 56
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 5
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
their long term plans, their ability to meet those plans, and
a recruitment strategy that includes outreach to women and
underrepresented minorities. SB 56 also creates monthly
electronic reporting requirements so the Division of
Apprenticeship Standards can track the progress of the
programs, as well as require reports be given to the
apprentice so he or she can keep track of his or her own
progress.
Finally, SB 56 would require that no two representatives from
employee organizations shall be from the same national or
international labor organization, which the author and sponsor
believe will encourage a diversity of trade representation on
the California Apprenticeship Council (CAC).
2. Controversy over the "Needs Based" Requirement:
In 1999, AB 921 (Keeley) included, among other things, the
"needs-based" conditions for the building and construction
trades, which make up 79% of all of the apprentices in the
state of California. As was discussed above, the "needs
based" criteria requires that any new program must justify its
need within the geographic area of operation. Since then, the
"needs-based" apprenticeship certification requirements have
been quite controversial, and are seen by some as a deterrent
to the establishment of new apprenticeship programs.
This bill does not touch upon or address the "needs based"
requirement found in existing law.
3. Proponent Arguments :
Proponents argue that this bill is necessary because the
Division of Apprenticeship Standards should be given the tools
to strengthen oversight and make apprenticeship programs
better. With the state of California spending almost $31
million annually on apprenticeship training, and private
industry and labor contributing an additional $120 million
annually in the construction industry alone, proponents argue
that it is important that we know how this substantial
Hearing Date: March 9, 2011 SB 56
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 6
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
investment is spent.
Proponents believe that SB 56 establishes basic guidelines for
the approval or expansion of apprenticeship programs. Under
its provisions, the applicant would submit a written plan that
includes evidence of suitable facilities, the selection
criteria and recruitment plans for apprentice applicants, an
estimate of the number of apprentices for enrollment, and
employer commitments for on-the-job training and employment.
4. Opponent Arguments :
None received.
5. Prior Legislation :
SB 1397 (Corbett) of 2010 was identical to this bill. It was
vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger because the bill "imposes
new requirements on new or expanding programs without
subjecting existing programs to the same level of scrutiny"
and did not address the "needs-based" conditions for
apprenticeship program approval.
AB 734 (Evans) of 2008 was nearly identical to this bill. It
was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger for similar reason
discussed above.
AB 947 (Niello) of 2007 would have removed the "needs-based"
conditions from the approval of apprenticeship programs. The
first policy committee hearing for the bill was cancelled at
the author's request.
AB 2929 (Laird) of 2006 contained language on the auditing of
apprenticeship programs that was very similar to AB 734. It
was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger because it did not
address the "needs-based" conditions for approving an
apprenticeship program in the building and construction
trades.
AB 51 (Koretz) of 2005, which was similar to AB 2837
(discussed below), was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger
because he did not feel that there was "compelling evidence
Hearing Date: March 9, 2011 SB 56
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 7
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations
that would warrant the extensive reporting requirements" in
the bill.
AB 2837 (Firebaugh) of 2004 would have, among other things,
required any building and construction trades apprenticeship
program to graduate at least one apprentice within a two-year
period in order to be eligible to receive state reimbursement.
It was vetoed by
Governor Schwarzenegger, as he viewed the bill as unnecessary
in view of the Labor and Workforce Development Agency's
development of quality control measures for apprenticeship
programs.
SUPPORT
State Buildings and Construction Trades Council (Sponsor)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees,
AFL-CIO (AFSCME)
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
OPPOSITION
None received.
Hearing Date: March 9, 2011 SB 56
Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 8
Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations