BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 117
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 117 (Kehoe)
As Amended June 30, 2011
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :21-15
BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS 6-3 JUDICIARY 7-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Hayashi, Allen, Butler, |Ayes:|Feuer, Atkins, Dickinson, |
| |Eng, Hill, Ma | |Huber, |
| | | |Huffman, Monning, |
| | | |Wieckowski |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Bill Berryhill, Hagman, |Nays:|Wagner, Beth Gaines, |
| |Smyth | |Jones |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Prohibits a state agency from entering into a goods or
services contract worth $100,000 or more, if in the provision of
benefits, the contractor discriminates between employees with
same or different sex spouses or partners, or discriminates
between same or different sex spouses or partners of employees.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prohibits a state agency from entering into a goods or
services contract worth $100,000 or more, if in the provision
of benefits, the contractor discriminates between employees
with spouses and employees with domestic partners, or
discriminates between the domestic partners and spouses of
those employees.
2)Provides that, notwithstanding any other law, that same-sex
marriages entered outside of California before passage of
Proposition 8 will be legally recognized as such in
California; and couples in all such marriages entered into
after passage of Proposition 8 will have all of the same
rights, responsibilities and obligations as married couples,
with the sole exception of using the legal designation of
"marriage."
SB 117
Page 2
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This bill has been keyed non-fiscal by
the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "The playing field for
contractors needs to be leveled by ensuring that entities that
discriminate are not given a competitive advantage over those
who treat their employees equally. Providing the same benefits
to an employee with a domestic partner, or same-sex or
opposite-sex spouse ensures that workers receive equal pay for
equal work. To do otherwise is essentially to discriminate
against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees.
"Providing equal benefits also shows respect for the diversity
of employees and their individual circumstances. Additionally,
treating employees fairly is a sound business practice. A
non-discriminatory benefits program enables employers to attract
and retain the best and most talented employees, lowers turnover
and recruitment costs, and helps improve employee job
satisfaction and performance."
AB 17 (Kehoe), Chapter 752, Statutes of 2003, prohibited a state
agency from entering into a contract for goods or services with
a contractor who discriminates in the provision of benefits
between employees with spouses and employees with domestic
partners or between the spouses and domestic partners of those
employees.
The sponsors note that several municipalities have already
passed ordinances similar to the language contained in this
bill. This bill arose as a result of these recent laws
affecting legal marriages and same-sex couples, and prohibits a
state agency from entering into a goods or services contract
worth $100,000 or more, if in the provision of benefits, the
contractor discriminates based on the gender or sexual
orientation of the spouses or domestic partners of its
employees. As a result of SB 54 (Leno), Chapter 625, Statutes
of 2009, this bill applies to out-of-state contractors
conducting business in the state.
Analysis Prepared by : Joanna Gin / B.,P. & C.P. / (916)
319-3301
SB 117
Page 3
FN: 0001468