BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 454
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 454 (Dickinson)
As Amended September 3, 2013
2/3 vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |53-23|(May 28, 2013) |SENATE: |28-11|(September 9, |
| | | | | |2013) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
|ASSEMBLY: | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |53-25|(September 10, | | | |
| | |2013) | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: INS.
SUMMARY : Requires calculation of certain workers' compensation
benefits based on the prevailing wage, not actual wages paid,
where prevailing wages should have been, but were not, paid.
The Senate amendments:
1)Recast the Assembly-passed provisions by adding the same basic
rule in a different Labor Code Section.
2)Provide that a determination by the Workers Compensation
Appeals Board (WCAB) or one of its Administrative Law Judges
on the issues of whether the project is a prevailing wage
project, and what wages should have been paid, shall have no
effect in any other administrative or judicial proceeding.
EXISTING LAW :
AB 454
Page 2
1)Provides for a comprehensive system of workers' compensation
benefits to be paid to workers whose injuries arise out of or
in the course of employment, including wage replacement
benefits in the event of temporary or permanent disability
resulting from the injury.
2)Establishes a formula for calculating the weekly temporary
disability (TD) benefits paid to a particular injured worker
using that worker's weekly wages, subject to a minimum benefit
and a cap based on the statewide average weekly wage.
3)Establishes a schedule of weekly permanent disability benefits
that includes the weekly wages earned by the injured worker.
4)Provides a worker who is paid below the prevailing wage, where
there is a prevailing wage requirement (public works
projects), a remedy to recover the wages that should have been
paid.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, the Department of Industrial Relations indicates that
the bill would cost $125,000 (special fund) due to increased
workload in making prevailing wage determinations.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose . According to the author, some employers take
advantage of workers who may not know about their rights to
receive a "prevailing" wage for work performed pursuant to
certain public works contracts. These employers pay below the
prevailing wage, even after bidding on a contract where they
included the higher wages as a part of their cost structure.
While there is a wage remedy for workers who are denied their
lawful wage, there is no similar remedy in cases where such a
worker is injured. The bill is intended to cure this lack of
remedy.
2)Prevailing wage . Pursuant to the laws of a number of
governmental jurisdictions, including state and local laws in
California, certain public works projects are subject to
AB 454
Page 3
requirements that the workers who perform the labor on the
projects are paid a "prevailing wage" - that is, a wage based
on the prevailing wage level in the locality where the work is
performed. The wage for any particular class of worker in any
particular locality is determined in advance and readily
available to a contractor who is bidding on or performing work
on the public works project.
3)Senate Amendments . The Senate initially sought to delegate
the decision making on the workers' compensation benefit to
the Labor Commissioner, who has authority to issue wage orders
for the actual unpaid wages. It also sought to require
expedited hearings by the Labor Commissioner. These proposals
were designed to ensure there would not be inconsistent
determinations as between the Labor Commissioner and a WCAB
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), and the expedited hearings
were designed to ensure the workers' compensation case would
not be delayed. However, cost concerns over the expedited
hearings arose, and as a result, the workers' compensation
benefit determination was returned to the ALJ, but its effect
was limited so as not to bind a Labor Commissioner exercising
his or her jurisdiction over wages.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
"I agree disability payments should be determined based on the
lawful wages paid, or that should have been paid, to an injured
worker. I am not convinced that this is not the existing
practice. Further, requiring a claims administrator to make
prevailing wage determinations as this measure proposes is a bad
idea."
Analysis Prepared by : Mark Rakich / INS. / (916) 319-2086
FN: 0002931
AB 454
Page 4