AB 848: Public contracts: University of California: California State University: domestic workers.
- Session Year: 2017-2018
- House: Assembly
- Latest Version Date: 2017-10-15
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill would prohibit, on or after July 1, 2017, the University of California and the California State University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies, under penalty of perjury, in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States or describes in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
The bill would prohibit the University of California and the California State University from expending funds for training for service contract employees located in foreign countries or for training for service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would require a contract entered into pursuant to the bill to provide, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, for the termination of the contract for noncompliance, as specified.
The bill would specify the circumstances under which a contractor or the University of California or the California State University would be found to have violated a provision of the bill. The bill would define displace for purposes of the bill as the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee of the University of California or the California State University, under specified conditions.
The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions would preclude the University of California and the California State University from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs, or to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects, conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill would prohibit, on or after July 1, 2017, the University of California and the California State University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies, under penalty of perjury, in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States or describes in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
The bill would prohibit the University of California and the California State University from expending funds for training for service contract employees located in foreign countries or for training for service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would require a contract entered into pursuant to the bill to provide, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, for the termination of the contract for noncompliance, as specified.
The bill would specify the circumstances under which a contractor or the University of California or the California State University would be found to have violated a provision of the bill. The bill would define displace for purposes of the bill as the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee of the University of California or the California State University, under specified conditions.
The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions would preclude the University of California and the California State University from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs, or to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects, conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill would prohibit, on or after July 1, 2017, the University of California and the California State University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract would displace, as defined, an employment position, as defined, of the University of California or the California State University, subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies certifies, under penalty of perjury perjury, in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States or describes in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
The bill would prohibit the University of California and the California State University from expending funds for training for service contract employees located in foreign countries or for training for service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employment position employee of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would require a contract entered into pursuant to the bill to provide, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, for the termination of the contract for noncompliance, as specified.
The bill would also specify that these provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.The bill would specify the circumstances under which a contractor or the University of California or the California State University would be found to have violated a provision of the bill. The bill would define displace for purposes of the bill as the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee of the University of California or the California State University, under specified conditions.
The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions would preclude the University of California and the California State University from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs, or to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects, conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill would prohibit, on or after July 1, 2017, the University of California and the California State University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract would displace, as defined, an employment position, as defined, of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
The bill would prohibit the University of California and the California State University from expending funds for training for service contract employees located in foreign countries or for training for service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would require a contract to provide, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, for the termination of the contract for noncompliance, as specified.
The bill would also specify that these provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs, or to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects, conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill would prohibit prohibit, on or after July 1, 2017, the University of California and the California State University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract would displace, as defined, an employment position, as defined, of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
The bill would prohibit the University of California and the California State University from expending funds for training for service contract employees located in foreign countries or for training for service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would require a contract to provide, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, for the termination of the contract for noncompliance, as specified.
The bill would also specify that these provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs programs, or to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects, conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill would prohibit the University of California and the California State University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract displaces a career employee would displace, as defined, an employment position, as defined, of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
The bill would prohibit the University of California and the California State University from allocating or expending funds for employment training for service contract employees located in foreign countries or for training for service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign countries, country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces a career employee an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
The bill would require a contract to provide, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, for the termination of the contract for noncompliance, as specified.
The bill would also specify that these provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill would prohibit the University of California, as a condition of receiving state funding, California and the California State University, University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor subcontractor, where that contract displaces a career employee of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for the contact that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States. This
The bill would prohibit the University of California, as a condition of receiving state funding, California and the California State University, University from allocating or expending funds for employment training for contract employees located in foreign countries. countries, if that contract displaces a career employee of the University of California or the California State University. The
The bill would require a contract to provide, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, for the termination of the contract for noncompliance, as specified.
The bill would also specify that these provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to agreements entered into by the Treasurer in connection with the sale of any evidence of indebtedness. contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
The
This bill would prohibit the University of California, to the extent that the Regents of the University of California act to make the provisions applicable, as a condition of receiving state funding, and the California State University University, from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for the contact that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States. This bill would prohibit the University of California, to the extent that the regents make applicable, as a condition of receiving state funding, and the California State University University, from allocating or expending funds for employment training for employees located in foreign countries. The bill would also specify that these provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to agreements entered into by the Treasurer in connection with the sale of any evidence of indebtedness.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(1)Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. Existing law, with specified exceptions, prohibits a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. Existing law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in that certification. Existing law also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
The bill would prohibit the University of California, to the extent that the Regents of the University of California act to make the provisions applicable, and the California State University from contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for the contact that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States. This bill would prohibit the University of California, to the extent that the regents make applicable, and the California State University from allocating or expending funds for employment training for employees located in foreign countries. The bill would also specify that these provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.
The bill would specify that these provisions do not apply to agreements entered into by the Treasurer in connection with the sale of any evidence of indebtedness.
By requiring contractors and subcontractors to make certifications under penalty of perjury, this bill would create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program.
(2)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the technology sector is a growing trend, with approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one billion three hundred sixty million dollars ($1,360,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)(1)Notwithstanding any other law, on or after July 1, 2017, neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor does either of the following:
(A)Certifies, under penalty of perjury, in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(B)Describes in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
(2)If the University of California or the California State University enters into a services contract with a contractor whose bid indicates that specific work will be performed by workers outside of the United States, the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, shall not, for the duration of that contract, displace an employee performing that specific work.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train service contract employees located in foreign countries or train service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(c)A contract entered into pursuant to subdivision (a) shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract and the contractor or subcontractor does not describe this work in his or her bid as referenced in subdivision (a), the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States.
(d)(1)A contractor shall be found to have violated subdivision (a) only to the extent that he or she fails to note in a bid any work to be accomplished by workers outside of the United States. The University of California or the California State University shall be found to have violated subdivision (a) only to the extent that the University of California or the California State University displaces an employee performing that specific work after having been notified in the contractors bid that the specific work would be performed by workers outside of the United States.
(2) For purposes of this section, displace means the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, involuntary transfer to a new location, or time base reduction of an employee, during the operation of a contract that is subject to this chapter, where the employee is performing the specific work that a contractor has identified as to be performed by workers outside of the United States and the reason for the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, or time base reduction of the employee is a direct result of the University of California or the California State University entering into the contract that is subject to this chapter.
(3)Notwithstanding the limitations imposed by subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), nothing in this section shall preclude the University of California and the California State University from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(e)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(f)This chapter does not apply to either of the following:
(1)Contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
(2)Contracts relating to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the technology sector is a growing trend, with approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one billion three hundred sixty million dollars ($1,360,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)(1)Notwithstanding any other law, on or after July 1, 2017, neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor does either of the following:
(A)Certifies, under penalty of perjury, in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(B)Describes in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
(2)If the University of California or the California State University enters into a services contract with a contractor whose bid indicates that specific work will be performed by workers outside of the United States, the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, shall not, for the duration of that contract, displace an employee performing that specific work.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train service contract employees located in foreign countries or train service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(c)A contract entered into pursuant to subdivision (a) shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract and the contractor or subcontractor does not describe this work in his or her bid as referenced in subdivision (a), the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States.
(d)(1)A contractor shall be found to have violated subdivision (a) only to the extent that he or she fails to note in a bid any work to be accomplished by workers outside of the United States. The University of California or the California State University shall be found to have violated subdivision (a) only to the extent that the University of California or the California State University displaces an employee performing that specific work after having been notified in the contractors bid that the specific work would be performed by workers outside of the United States.
(2) For purposes of this section, displace means the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, involuntary transfer to a new location, or time base reduction of an employee, during the operation of a contract that is subject to this chapter, where the employee is performing the specific work that a contractor has identified as to be performed by workers outside of the United States and the reason for the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, or time base reduction of the employee is a direct result of the University of California or the California State University entering into the contract that is subject to this chapter.
(3)Notwithstanding the limitations imposed by subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), nothing in this section shall preclude the University of California and the California State University from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(e)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(f)This chapter does not apply to either of the following:
(1)Contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
(2)Contracts relating to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the technology sector is a growing trend, with approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one billion three hundred sixty million dollars ($1,360,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)(1)Notwithstanding any other law, on or after July 1, 2017, neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University, subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies does either of the following:
(A)Certifies, under penalty of perjury perjury, in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(B)Describes in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
(2)If the University of California or the California State University enters into a services contract with a contractor whose bid indicates that specific work will be performed by workers outside of the United States, the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, shall not, for the duration of that contract, displace an employee performing that specific work.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train service contract employees located in foreign countries or train service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employment position employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(c)The contract A contract entered into pursuant to subdivision (a) shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, contract and the contractor or subcontractor does not describe this work in his or her bid as referenced in subdivision (a), the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States, if that contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University. States.
(d)For purposes of this section: (1)Displace(d)(1)A contractor shall be found to have violated subdivision (a) only to the extent that he or she fails to note in a bid any work to be accomplished by workers outside of the United States. The University of California or the California State University shall be found to have violated subdivision (a) only to the extent that the University of California or the California State University displaces an employee performing that specific work after having been notified in the contractors bid that the specific work would be performed by workers outside of the United States.
(2) For purposes of this section, displace means the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, involuntary transfer to a new location, or time base reduction of an employment position that occurs within 24 months of the date of the commencement of the operation of a employee, during the operation of a contract that is subject to this chapter, where the employee is performing the specific work that a contractor has identified as to be performed by workers outside of the United States and the reason for the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, or time base reduction of the employee is a direct result of the University of California or the California State University entering into the contract that is subject to this chapter.
(2)Employment position means the position of a career employee, permanent employee, or limited-term employee.(3)Notwithstanding the limitations imposed by subdivisions (a), (b), and (c), nothing in this section shall preclude the University of California and the California State University from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(e)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(f)This chapter does not apply to either of the following:
(1)Contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
(2)Contracts relating to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the technology sector is a growing trend, with approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one billion three hundred sixty million dollars ($1,360,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, on or after July 1, 2017, neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train service contract employees located in foreign countries or train service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
(c)The contract shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States, if that contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
(d)For purposes of this section:
(1)Displace means the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, involuntary transfer to a new location, or time base reduction of an employment position that occurs within 24 months of the date of the commencement of the operation of a contract that is subject to this chapter.
(2)Employment position means the position of a career employee, temporary employee, casual employee, seasonal employee, limited-term employee, per diem employee, or contracted-out employee, or a vacant position. permanent employee, or limited-term employee.
(e)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(f)This chapter does not apply to either of the following:
(1)Contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
(2)Contracts relating to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the technology sector is a growing trend, with approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one billion three hundred sixty million dollars ($1,360,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, on or after July 1, 2017, neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train service contract employees located in foreign countries or train service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
(c)The contract shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States, if that contract displaces an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
(d)For purposes of this section:
(1)Displace means the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, involuntary transfer to a new location, or time base reduction of an employment position. position that occurs within 24 months of the date of the commencement of the operation of a contract that is subject to this chapter.
(2)Employment position means the position of a career employee, temporary employee, casual employee, seasonal employee, limited-term employee, per diem employee, or contracted-out employee, or a vacant position.
(e)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(f)This chapter does not apply to contracts either of the following:
(1)Contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
(2)Contracts relating to international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the technology sector is a growing trend, with approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one billion three hundred sixty million dollars ($1,360,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract displaces a career employee an employment position of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train service contract employees located in foreign countries or train service contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the service contract, if that service contract displaces a career employee an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
(c)The contract shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States, if that contract displaces a career employee an employment position of the University of California or the California State University.
(d)For purposes of this section:
(1)Displace means the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, involuntary transfer to a new location, or time base reduction of an employment position.
(2)Employment position means the position of a career employee, temporary employee, casual employee, seasonal employee, limited-term employee, per diem employee, or contracted-out employee, or a vacant position.
(d)(e)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(e)(f)This chapter does not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the technology sector is a growing trend, with approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one hundred thirty-six billion dollars ($136,000,000,000) billion three hundred sixty million dollars ($1,360,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Section 5703 of the Government Code is amended to read:5703.(a)Except as provided in subdivisions (b), (c), and (d), the Treasurer, in exercising the duties of agent for offering and selling bonds, whose duties include, among others, establishing the timing of a sale, preparation or approval of the documentation for the sale, sole authority to select the underwriters for negotiating the sale, and executing the bond purchase agreement on behalf of the state or the states agencies, is responsible for developing and implementing a competitive process for selection of underwriters for negotiated offerings of bonds. The competitive process may be conducted on an issue-by-issue basis or to establish one or more pools of underwriters for various types of issues. The competitive process shall have at least all of the following features:(1)Solicitation of written qualifications from at least 20 underwriting firms.(2)Consideration of the goals for minority and women business enterprise participation in professional bond services contracts.(3)The written submissions shall be available for inspection at the office of the Treasurer for a period of at least six months.(4)If a pool of underwriters is established, the competitive process shall be repeated at least every 24 months to reestablish the pool of underwriters.(b)For negotiated offerings of bonds by state financing authorities that act as conduits to provide financing to other public, nonprofit, or private organizations, the Treasurer shall use the competitive process described in subdivision (a) to establish one or more pools of underwriters for each financing authority. The Treasurer may make additions to a pool without competitive solicitation, on a case-by-case determination upon the recommendation of a project applicant, where the Treasurer finds that the underwriter to be added has provided significant services to the project applicant with the expectation of compensation for those services from underwriting the revenue bonds which will fund the applicants project.(c)The Treasurer may select underwriters for a negotiated sale of bonds by means other than as described in subdivision (a) if the Treasurer makes a written finding that extraordinary market conditions do not allow enough time to comply with subdivision (a) without risking financial detriment to the state.(d)Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall not apply to the issuance of state bonds for which the Treasurer is precluded by statute from selecting underwriters.(e)For negotiated sales, the Treasurer shall maintain records of all cost information pertinent to the initial offering of all state bonds, except that in the case of bonds issued by a state financing authority, as described in subdivision (b), the issuing state financing authority shall instead be responsible for maintaining the same cost information on bonds it has issued. The information shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:(1)All amounts paid out of bond proceeds to the underwriter, detailed by management fee, takedown, risk, and underwriters expenses.(2)All costs paid out of bond proceeds to rating agencies for rating of the bonds.(3)All fees paid out of bond proceeds to bond counsels, trustees, or financial advisers relating to the initial offering of the bonds.(4)The interest rate to be paid on the bonds.(f)For competitive sales, the Treasurer shall maintain records of all bids submitted and the documentation of bid verifications including the terms of sale and the calculation of net interest cost or true interest cost.(g)The State Auditor shall audit the cost records required to be maintained pursuant to subdivision (e) and conduct a review of the records required to be maintained pursuant to subdivision (f).(h)The State Auditor shall report whether this section is being fully implemented. The State Auditor shall make cost and interest rate comparisons with similar initial bond offerings of other states where possible. The State Auditor shall submit a report to the Legislature on March 1, 1993, and March 1, 1995, for bonds sold during the two calendar years immediately preceding the year in which the report is due.(i)The following provisions of the Public Contract Code do not apply to agreements entered into by the Treasurer in connection with the sale of any evidence of indebtedness:(1)Section 10295.(2)Article 4 (commencing with Section 10335) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 2.(3)Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) of Part 2 of Division 2.SEC. 3.SEC. 2.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, except as provided in subdivision (e), neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor subcontractor, where that contract displaces a career employee of the University of California or the California State University, unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for the contact that contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, except as provided in subdivision (e), neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train contract employees located in foreign countries or train contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the contract. contract, if that contract displaces a career employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(c)The contract shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States. States, if that contract displaces a career employee of the University of California or the California State University.
(d)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(e)This chapter shall apply to the University of California as a condition of receiving state funding. does not apply to contracts relating to study abroad programs conducted by the University of California or the California State University.
SEC. 4.SEC. 3.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the state and local government technology sector is a growing trend, with an estimated $____ billion in net contract value subject to outsourcing to foreign countries in ____. By ____, an estimated $____ billion in net contract value will be subject to outsourcing by the state and local government technology sector. approximately 1.7 million jobs outsourced from the United States and an estimated one hundred thirty-six billion dollars ($136,000,000,000) lost to outsourcing since the year 2000.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Section 5703 of the Government Code is amended to read:5703.(a)Except as provided in subdivisions (b), (c), and (d), the Treasurer, in exercising the duties of agent for offering and selling bonds, whose duties include, among others, establishing the timing of a sale, preparation or approval of the documentation for the sale, sole authority to select the underwriters for negotiating the sale, and executing the bond purchase agreement on behalf of the state or the states agencies, is responsible for developing and implementing a competitive process for selection of underwriters for negotiated offerings of bonds. The competitive process may be conducted on an issue-by-issue basis or to establish one or more pools of underwriters for various types of issues. The competitive process shall have at least all of the following features:
(1)Solicitation of written qualifications from at least 20 underwriting firms.
(2)Consideration of the goals for minority and women business enterprise participation in professional bond services contracts.
(3)The written submissions shall be available for inspection at the office of the Treasurer for a period of at least six months.
(4)If a pool of underwriters is established, the competitive process shall be repeated at least every 24 months to reestablish the pool of underwriters.
(b)For negotiated offerings of bonds by state financing authorities that act as conduits to provide financing to other public, nonprofit, or private organizations, the Treasurer shall use the competitive process described in subdivision (a) to establish one or more pools of underwriters for each financing authority. The Treasurer may make additions to a pool without competitive solicitation, on a case-by-case determination upon the recommendation of a project applicant, where the Treasurer finds that the underwriter to be added has provided significant services to the project applicant with the expectation of compensation for those services from underwriting the revenue bonds which will fund the applicants project.
(c)The Treasurer may select underwriters for a negotiated sale of bonds by means other than as described in subdivision (a) if the Treasurer makes a written finding that extraordinary market conditions do not allow enough time to comply with subdivision (a) without risking financial detriment to the state.
(d)Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall not apply to the issuance of state bonds for which the Treasurer is precluded by statute from selecting underwriters.
(e)For negotiated sales, the Treasurer shall maintain records of all cost information pertinent to the initial offering of all state bonds, except that in the case of bonds issued by a state financing authority, as described in subdivision (b), the issuing state financing authority shall instead be responsible for maintaining the same cost information on bonds it has issued. The information shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(1)All amounts paid out of bond proceeds to the underwriter, detailed by management fee, takedown, risk, and underwriters expenses.
(2)All costs paid out of bond proceeds to rating agencies for rating of the bonds.
(3)All fees paid out of bond proceeds to bond counsels, trustees, or financial advisers relating to the initial offering of the bonds.
(4)The interest rate to be paid on the bonds.
(f)For competitive sales, the Treasurer shall maintain records of all bids submitted and the documentation of bid verifications including the terms of sale and the calculation of net interest cost or true interest cost.
(g)The State Auditor shall audit the cost records required to be maintained pursuant to subdivision (e) and conduct a review of the records required to be maintained pursuant to subdivision (f).
(h)The State Auditor shall report whether this section is being fully implemented. The State Auditor shall make cost and interest rate comparisons with similar initial bond offerings of other states where possible. The State Auditor shall submit a report to the Legislature on March 1, 1993, and March 1, 1995, for bonds sold during the two calendar years immediately preceding the year in which the report is due.
(i)The following provisions of the Public Contract Code do not apply to agreements entered into by the Treasurer in connection with the sale of any evidence of indebtedness:
(1)Section 10295.
(2)Article 4 (commencing with Section 10335) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 2.
(3)Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) of Part 2 of Division 2.
SEC. 3.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, except as provided in subdivision (e), neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for the contact that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, except as provided in subdivision (e), neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train employees located in foreign countries or train contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the contract.
(c)The contract shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States.
(d)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(e)This chapter shall apply to the University of California only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California act, by resolution, to make it applicable. as a condition of receiving state funding.
SEC. 4.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a)The United States has lost nearly five million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country.
(b)Outsourcing by the state and local government technology sector is a growing trend, with an estimated $____ billion in net contract value subject to outsourcing to foreign countries in ____. By ____, an estimated $____ billion in net contract value will be subject to outsourcing by the state and local government technology sector.
(c)Contractors and subcontractors are using taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State taxpayer funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.
SEC. 2.Section 5703 of the Government Code is amended to read:5703.(a)Except as provided in subdivisions (b), (c), and (d), the Treasurer, in exercising the duties of agent for offering and selling bonds, whose duties include, among others, establishing the timing of a sale, preparation or approval of the documentation for the sale, sole authority to select the underwriters for negotiating the sale, and executing the bond purchase agreement on behalf of the state or the states agencies, is responsible for developing and implementing a competitive process for selection of underwriters for negotiated offerings of bonds. The competitive process may be conducted on a an issue-by-issue basis or to establish one or more pools of underwriters for various types of issues. The competitive process shall have at least all of the following features:
(1)Solicitation of written qualifications from at least 20 underwriting firms.
(2)Consideration of the goals for minority and women business enterprise participation in professional bond services contracts.
(3)The written submissions shall be available for inspection at the office of the Treasurer for a period of at least six months.
(4)If a pool of underwriters is established, the competitive process shall be repeated at least every 24 months to reestablish the pool of underwriters.
(b)For negotiated offerings of bonds by state financing authorities that act as conduits to provide financing to other public, nonprofit, or private organizations, the Treasurer shall use the competitive process described in subdivision (a) to establish one or more pools of underwriters for each financing authority. The Treasurer may make additions to a pool without competitive solicitation, on a case-by-case determination upon the recommendation of a project applicant, where the Treasurer finds that the underwriter to be added has provided significant services to the project applicant with the expectation of compensation for those services from underwriting the revenue bonds which will fund the applicants project.
(c)The Treasurer may select underwriters for a negotiated sale of bonds by means other than as described in subdivision (a) if the Treasurer makes a written finding that extraordinary market conditions do not allow enough time to comply with subdivision (a) without risking financial detriment to the state.
(d)Subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall not apply to the issuance of state bonds for which the Treasurer is precluded by statute from selecting underwriters.
(e)For negotiated sales, the Treasurer shall maintain records of all cost information pertinent to the initial offering of all state bonds, except that in the case of bonds issued by a state financing authority, as described in subdivision (b), the issuing state financing authority shall instead be responsible for maintaining the same cost information on bonds it has issued. The information shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(1)All amounts paid out of bond proceeds to the underwriter, detailed by management fee, takedown, risk, and underwriters expenses.
(2)All costs paid out of bond proceeds to rating agencies for rating of the bonds.
(3)All fees paid out of bond proceeds to bond counsels, trustees, or financial advisers relating to the initial offering of the bonds.
(4)The interest rate to be paid on the bonds.
(f)For competitive sales, the Treasurer shall maintain records of all bids submitted and the documentation of bid verifications including the terms of sale and the calculation of net interest cost or true interest cost.
(g)The State Auditor shall audit the cost records required to be maintained pursuant to subdivision (e) and conduct a review of the records required to be maintained pursuant to subdivision (f).
(h)The State Auditor shall report whether this section is being fully implemented. The State Auditor shall make cost and interest rate comparisons with similar initial bond offerings of other states where possible. The State Auditor shall submit a report to the Legislature on March 1, 1993, and March 1, 1995, for bonds sold during the two calendar years immediately preceding the year in which the report is due.
(i)Section 10295 of, and Article 4 (commencing with Section 10335) and Article 5 (commencing with Section 10355) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of, The following provisions of the Public Contract Code are do not applicable apply to agreements entered into by the Treasurer in connection with the sale of any evidence of indebtedness. indebtedness:
(1)Section 10295.
(2)Article 4 (commencing with Section 10335) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division 2.
(3)Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) of Part 2 of Division 2.
SEC. 3.Chapter 3.9 (commencing with Section 12147) is added to Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, to read:3.9.Offshoring University of California and California State University Contracts12147.(a)Notwithstanding any other law, except as provided in subdivision (e), neither the University of California nor the California State University may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for the contact that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States.
(b)Notwithstanding any other law, except as provided in subdivision (e), neither the University of California nor the California State University may expend funds to train employees located in foreign countries or train contract employees who plan to relocate to a foreign country as part of the contract.
(c)The contract shall provide that, in the event a contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers outside the United States during the life of the contract, the contract shall be terminated for noncompliance, and the contractor or subcontractor shall forfeit penalties to the University of California or the California State University, as appropriate, in an amount equal to the amount paid by the university for the percentage of work that was performed with workers outside the United States.
(d)This chapter does not apply to a contract if refusing to award that contract, on the basis that the contractor or subcontractor does not certify under penalty of perjury that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States, would violate the specific terms of the Agreement on Government Procurement of the World Trade Organization or any other bilateral or regional free trade agreement that California has consented to.
(e)This chapter shall apply to the University of California only to the extent that the Regents of the University of California act, by resolution, to make it applicable.
SEC. 4.No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Oct 15, 2017 | Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 844, Statutes of 2017. |
| Oct 15, 2017 | Approved by the Governor. |
| Sep 20, 2017 | Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4:30 p.m. |
| Sep 13, 2017 | Assembly Rule 77(a) suspended. |
| Sep 13, 2017 | In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 15 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77. |
| Sep 12, 2017 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. |
| Sep 11, 2017 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Sep 8, 2017 | Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading. |
| Sep 5, 2017 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| Sep 1, 2017 | Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading. |
| Aug 21, 2017 | In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file. |
| Jul 12, 2017 | Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Jul 11, 2017 | From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (July 5). |
| Jun 26, 2017 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on ED. |
| Jun 13, 2017 | In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author. |
| Jun 8, 2017 | Referred to Com. on ED. |
| May 30, 2017 | In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. |
| May 30, 2017 | Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 59. Noes 18. Page 1778.) |
| May 11, 2017 | Read second time. Ordered to third reading. |
| May 10, 2017 | From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 14. Noes 3.) (May 10). |
| Apr 26, 2017 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (April 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Apr 20, 2017 | Re-referred to Com. on A. & A.R. |
| Apr 19, 2017 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on A. & A.R. Read second time and amended. |
| Apr 19, 2017 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on A. & A.R. (Ayes 8. Noes 4.) (April 18). Re-referred to Com. on A. & A.R. |
| Apr 6, 2017 | Re-referred to Com. on HIGHER ED. |
| Apr 5, 2017 | From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on HIGHER ED. Read second time and amended. |
| Mar 2, 2017 | Referred to Coms. on HIGHER ED. and A. & A.R. |
| Feb 17, 2017 | From printer. May be heard in committee March 19. |
| Feb 16, 2017 | Read first time. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2017 | AB 848 McCarty Concurrence in Senate Amendments | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| Sep 12, 2017 | Assembly 3rd Reading AB848 McCarty et al. By Lara | Senate Floor |
Passed |
|
| Sep 1, 2017 | Do pass as amended | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Aug 21, 2017 | Placed on suspense file | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Jul 5, 2017 | Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Senate Standing Committee on Education |
Passed |
|
| May 30, 2017 | AB 848 MCCARTY Assembly Third Reading | Assembly Floor |
Passed |
|
| May 10, 2017 | Do pass. | Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Apr 26, 2017 | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Assembly Standing Committee on Accountability and Administrative Review |
Passed |
|
| Apr 18, 2017 | Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Accountability and Administrative Review] | Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| ARNOLD & PORTER | * Support | Apr 18, 2017 |
| California Federation Of Teachers | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| California Labor Federation | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| California Nurses Association | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| California Professional Firefighters | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| California School Employees Association | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| California State University | ** Against | Sep 12, 2017 |
| California State University Employees Union | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| Communication Workers of America | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| CSU Board | * Indeterminate | Apr 18, 2017 |
| CW 9400 | * Support | Apr 26, 2017 |
| DCWA | * Support | Apr 18, 2017 |
| Local 9404 | * Support | Apr 26, 2017 |
| Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 | * Support | Apr 18, 2017 |
| UAW Academic Locals | * For If Amend | Apr 18, 2017 |
| UC Berkeley | * Support | Apr 18, 2017 |
| UC Santa Cruz | * Support | Apr 18, 2017 |
| UCSF | * Support | Apr 26, 2017 |
| undefined | * Support | Apr 26, 2017 |
| Union Of American Physicians And Dentists | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
| University of California | * Indeterminate | Apr 18, 2017 |
| UPTE-CWA Local 9119 | ** Support | Sep 12, 2017 |
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
CSA1 Bill Id:AB 848
Author:(McCarty)
As Amended Ver:September 8, 2017
Majority vote
ASSEMBLY: | 59-18 | (May 30, 2017) | SENATE: | 33-6 | (September 12, 2017) |
Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.
SUMMARY: Prohibits the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) from contracting for services performed by workers outside of the United States that would displace a UC or CSU employee. Specifically, this bill:
- Requires contractors and subcontractors to certify under penalty of perjury in their bids that work will be performed solely with workers in the United States.
- Specifies that if the UC or CSU enter into a contract with a contractor whose work will be performed outside of the United States, the UC or CSU shall not, for the duration of the contract, displace an employee performing that specific work.
- Prohibits the UC and the CSU from training service contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad as part of the contract, if it would displace an employment position.
- Requires the contract to be terminated if the contractor or subcontractor uses workers outside of the United States and does not describe this work in the bid, and sets a method for calculating penalties.
- Specifies that a contractor is in violation of this bill when failing to note in a bid any work to be accomplished by workers outside of the United States. The UC or CSU is in violation of the bill when displacing an employee performing that specific work after having been notified in the contractor's bid that the specific work would be performed by workers outside of the United States.
- Defines "displace" to mean the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee during the operation of a contract, where the employee is performing the specific work that a contractor has identified as to be performed by workers outside of the United States and the displacement is a direct result of entering into the contract.
- Specifies that nothing in the bill precludes the UC or CSU from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee.
- Exempts UC and CSU study abroad programs and international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects from the requirements of this bill.
- Exempts contracts from the requirements of this bill if they would violate a specified World Trade Organization Agreement.
The Senate amendments:
- Specify that the provisions of this bill, notwithstanding any other law, apply to the UC and CSU on or after July 01, 2017.
- Requires contractors and subcontractors to describe in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
- Specify that if the UC or CSU enter into a contract with a contractor whose work will be performed outside of the United States, the UC or CSU shall not, for the duration of the contract, displace an employee performing that specific work.
- Specifies the circumstances under which a contractor or the UC or the CSU would be found to have violated a provision of the bill.
- Defines "displace" for purposes of the bill as the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee of the UC or CSU under specified conditions.
- Specifies that nothing in the bill precludes the UC or CSU from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee.
- Make technical and clarifying changes.
EXISTING LAW:
- Requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. (Public Contracting Code (PCC) Section 10180 et seq.)
- Prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. (PCC Section 12140)
- Imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in the above certification. (PCC Section 12140)
- Also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance, and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract. (PCC Section 12140)
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the CSU indicates that with total service contracts of approximately $500 million per year, it could see higher bids in the range of 10% to 30% by contractors who wish to cover their increased risk. Assuming one-quarter of its contracts used some sort of secondary services overseas, CSU estimates that the increased bid amounts could range from $12.5 million to $37.5 million annually. These costs would increase if there is a higher percentage of such contracts. CSU also indicates that the bill would increase the likelihood of employee/union complaints. Assuming just 10 complaints that result in arbitration hearings, the cost to the CSU would be $300,000 per year.
UC anticipates that the overall costs from the expanded administrative requirements, increased staffing, legal expenses, and higher costs of contracts would range from $2 million to $5 million, with the potential for larger fiscal impacts in the longer term to the extent that future contract invalidations discourage suppliers from bidding on UC contracts or they encourage the submission of higher bid amounts as an effort to hedge against invalidation risk.
COMMENTS: Purpose. This bill is intended to combat the outsourcing of United States jobs to foreign countries and foreign workers, a phenomenon known as "offshoring." The author argues that "…AB 848 would prohibit the offshoring of [UC] and [CSU] jobs to foreign countries. This bill would prohibit the UC and CSU from using state funds for services, unless the contractor certifies that the work will be performed solely with workers within the United States. In addition, this bill would prohibit both the segments from using state funds to train contract employees that plan to relocate to a foreign country."
Background. In November, 2016 UC San Francisco (UCSF) announced that they had "…entered into contracts with outside vendors for specified IT services, a move that will save the university more than $30 million over five years and allow it to meet sharply increased demands for IT capacity and strength, while improving cyber security."
UCSF's contract with outside vendors resulted in the loss of 49 IT career positions and the elimination of 48 other positions that were either vacant or filled by contracted staff, and constitutes a 17% reduction in IT staffing.
UCSF noted that the clinical component of the university, UCSF Health, is self-supporting and receives no state funding. The $30 million in savings realized over the course of UCSF's five year contract with HCL Technologies, an Indian outsourcing firm that is one of UCSF's three IT vendors, represents .01% of UCSF's $5.8 billion budget in 2015-2016. The LA Times reported that UCSF Health recorded a $42 million deficit in 2015-2016, in part as a byproduct of implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
UCSF indicated that all impacted UCSF career employees received six-months advance notice of intention to terminate, and that per UC policy the employees are eligible for job placement assistance including assistance in finding other positions from across the UC system. If the employees do not find alternative employment within the UC system, they may also be eligible for severance to assist in their transition. UCSF noted that between five campuses and the UC Office of the President, more than 100 IT positions have already been identified as open and available.
The contract for services between HCL Technologies and UCSF provides other UC campuses with an opportunity to take advantage of the same outsourced IT support services. According the measure's sponsor, the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE)-CWA Local 9119, applying the same 17% loss ratio across UC's 10 campuses and five medical centers could result in a total of 613 lost positions. UC Berkeley, UC Los Angles, and UC San Diego could each lose over 100 career IT positions.
Examples of offshoring. Though UCSF's decision to contract out their IT services with HCL Technologies is precedent-setting for California's higher education institutions, there have been many recent examples of major companies working with vendors that use similar models. In October 2014, Disney announced the layoff of 250 IT employees after Disney entered into a contract with HCL America. Of those laid off, 120 took new jobs at Disney, and about 40 retired or left the company before the end of the transition period, while about 90 did not find new Disney jobs.
In April 2014, Southern California Edison (SCE) announced it would be laying off 400-500 IT workers at its Irwindale, California location. SCE has also stated that an additional 100 employees would be leaving voluntarily. The 500 lost jobs reportedly represent just over a quarter to a third of the SCE Irwindale facility IT workforce of 1,500 to 1,800 employees.
In 2015, news reports in the Los Angeles Times, and other outlets, surfaced that SCE was replacing laid-off workers with outsourced contracted workers from two Indian companies, Infosys and Tata. Some of these news reports included claims by SCE laid off workers that they were being asked to train their replacements who were in the country on H-1B visas.
H-1B Visas. H-1B visas were introduced by the federal government in 1990, and over the years the annual cap on them has ranged up to 195,000, and currently stands at 65,000 (plus 20,000 for individuals with master's degrees). Under federal law, visa users must have specialized training or a bachelor's degree in the subject for which they are being hired. The visa holder must be offered the prevailing wage for the work, and they can only take jobs for which employers could not find a qualified American worker.
The New York Times reported that in 2014, 13 outsourcing firms accounted for one-third of all H-1B visas. In many cases, their employees are paid slightly more than the $60,000-a-year minimum salary required by the visa program for dependent companies seeking a waiver from having to recruit Americans first, but less than what American technology workers make.
Lawmakers and the public have raised concerns about potential abuses with the H-1B visa program after several news reports have noted the potential widespread abuse of the program by companies who are looking to reduce their costs at the expense of American workers. Many of these news stories have included claims by laid off employees that they are required to train their replacements who are H-1B visa holders in exchange for their severance or other benefits package, and/or on condition of confidentiality. At UCSF, the New York Times reported that employees losing their positions had to attend "knowledge transfer sessions" where HCL staff members in India were trained via videoconference - by the employees – on how to do their new jobs.
In March 2015, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on "Immigration Reforms Needed to Protect Skilled American Workers." The hearing focused on the H-1B visa program, the ability to bring high-skilled workers in the country to help companies compete, but also noted concerns with stories of abuse by employers who are displacing American workers in a manner inconsistent with the requirements or intent of the visa program.
Committee staff notes that, while H1-B visa holders were brought in on a temporary basis, UCSF has indicated that neither it nor HCL plan to replaced their laid-off workers with H1-B visa holders.
Related legislation: SB 574 (Lara) of the current legislative session, pending on the Assembly Floor, modifies the requirements for qualifying as a lowest responsible bidder or best value awardee for contracts for specified types of service contacts at the UC.
SB 959 (Lara) of 2016, and SB 376 (Lara) of 2015, which were substantively similar to SB 574, were vetoed.
AB 853 (Hernández) of 2015, was held on the Senate Floor. This bill requires an electrical and gas investor-owned utility to utilize employees of the utility for any work associated with the design, engineering, and operation of its nuclear, electrical and gas infrastructure, unless the utility has prior approval from the California Public Utilities Commission to contract out that work.
AB 1829 (Liu) of 2004, was vetoed. This bill would have prohibited a state agency or local government, as defined, from allocating or expending state funds for employment training for employees located in foreign countries.
Analysis Prepared by: Kevin J. Powers / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0002306
Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB |
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 848
Amended: 9/8/17 in Senate
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 6-0, 7/5/17
AYES: Allen, Wilk, Galgiani, Leyva, Pan, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Mendoza
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 9/1/17
AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Bradford, Hill, Wiener
NOES: Nielsen
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 59-18, 5/30/17 - See last page for vote
SOURCE: California State University Employees Union
UPTE-CWA Local 9119
DIGEST:
This bill prohibits the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) from contracting for services performed by workers outside of the United States that would displace a UC or CSU employee.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/8/17:
- Modify this prohibition to delete the condition that a contract would displace an employment position, and instead add the condition that the contractor or subcontractor describe in his or her bid any parts of the work that will be performed by workers outside of the United States.
- Prohibit the UC or CSU, if entering into a services contract with a contractor whose bid indicates that specific work will be performed by workers outside of the United States, from displacing an employee performing that specific work for the duration of that contract.
- Clarify that the contract shall be terminated for non-compliance if the contractor or subcontractor does not describe the work with workers outside the United States, and deletes the condition that an employment position is displaced.
- Require a contractor to be found to have violated the provisions of this bill only to the extent that he or she fails to note in a bid any work to be accomplished by workers outside of the United States. The amendments require the UC or CSU to be found to have violated the provisions of this bill only to the extent that the UC or CSU displaces an employee performing that specific work after having been notified in the contractor’s bid that the specific work would be performed by workers outside of the United States.
- Modify the definition of “displace” from layoff, demotion, etc. of an employment position that occurs within 24 months of the date of the beginning of the operation of a contract, to layoff, demotion, etc. of an employee, during the operation of a contract that is subject to this bill where the employee is performing the specific work that a contractor has identified as to be performed by workers outside of the United States and the reason for the layoff, demotion, etc. is a direct result of the UC or CSU entering into the contract.
- Provide that beyond the limitations imposed by this bill, nothing in this bill is to preclude the UC and the CSU from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee of the UC or CSU.
Existing law:
- Requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts.
- Prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California.
- Imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in the above certification.
- Requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance, and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill:
- Requires contractors and subcontractors to certify under penalty of perjury in their bids that work will be performed solely with workers in the United States.
- Specifies that if the UC or CSU enter into a contract with a contractor whose work will be performed outside of the United States, the UC or CSU shall not, for the duration of the contract, displace an employee performing that specific work.
- Prohibits the UC and the CSU from training service contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad as part of the contract, if it would displace an employment position.
- Requires the contract to be terminated if the contractor or subcontractor uses workers outside of the United States and does not describe this work in the bid, and sets a method for calculating penalties.
- Specifies that a contractor is in violation of this bill when failing to note in a bid any work to be accomplished by workers outside of the United States. The UC or CSU is in violation of this bill when displacing an employee performing that specific work after having been notified in the contractor’s bid that the specific work would be performed by workers outside of the United States.
- Defines “displace” to mean the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee during the operation of a contract, where the employee is performing the specific work that a contractor has identified as to be performed by workers outside of the United States and the displacement is a direct result of entering into the contract.
- Specifies that nothing in the bill precludes the UC or CSU from contracting with a contractor or subcontractor that utilizes workers in offshore operations in circumstances that do not directly result in the displacement of an employee.
- Exempts UC and CSU study abroad programs and international teaching, research, or public service activities and projects from the requirements of this bill.
- Exempts contracts from the requirements of this bill if they would violate a specified World Trade Organization Agreement.
Comments
- Need for the bill. According to the author, “The United States has lost nearly 5 million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country. In 2004, the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) offshored its medical transcription services to a company in Pakistan. However, the contractor, disappointed with her pay, attempted to extort the school by threatening to release all private medical data onto the internet if she was not compensated fairly. Fortunately, the issue was resolved without incident.
“Recently in July of 2016, UCSF offshored 17% of its IT services to a company called HCL—a contracting company out of India. UCSF’s contract with HCL is for 5-years and worth $50 million. UCSF asserts that outsourcing would save them $30 million over the next 5 years. Employees were warned of the possibility of outsourcing, but were eventually given a lay off date of February 28, 2017 and told to train their own replacements.
“The University of California is establishing a precarious precedent by contracting out good paying, middle class IT jobs, not only out of California, but to a foreign country. State funding should not be used to fund contractors and subcontractors such as HCL, at the expense of taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and California.”
- India-based offshoring by UCSF and potentially all other UC campuses. According to UCSF, the campus faces difficult circumstances because of the Affordable Healthcare Act, which has increased the volume of patients but limits reimbursement to around 55 cents on the dollar. Over the past five years, which saw the advent of electronic medical records, IT has moved from being responsible for three percent of operating expenses to six percent. That includes more spending on IT security and analytics.
UCSF’s contract with HCL resulted in the loss of 49 IT career positions and the elimination of 48 other positions that were either vacant or filled by contracted staff, and constitutes a 17 percent reduction in IT staffing.
The UCSF indicated that all impacted UCSF career employees received six-months advance notice of intention to terminate, and that per UC policy the employees are eligible for job placement assistance, including assistance in finding other positions from across the UC system. If the employees do not find alternative employment within the UC system, they may also be eligible for severance to assist in their transition. UCSF noted that between five campuses and the UC Office of the President, more than 100 IT positions have already been identified as open and available.
The contract for services between HCL Technologies and UCSF provides all of the other 10 UC campuses, which serve about 240,000 students and employ about 190,000 faculty and staff, with the opportunity to take advantage of the same outsourced IT support services. According the sponsors of this bill, applying the same 17 percent loss ratio across UC's 10 campuses and five medical centers could result in a total of 613 lost positions.
- Policy tradeoffs to consider. As numerous reports on offshoring services have noted in recent years, legislation restricting its use related to state contracts involves a number of tradeoffs. Specifically, restrictions on government contracting can increase costs as workers at risk of being displaced by offshoring tend to be relatively skilled and have a history of relatively high wages. To the extent that restrictions on UC and CSU contracts mean the segments will pay more for certain services than they otherwise could, the segments will have less money for other purposes, such as financial aid or increased course offerings. Further, is restricting the contracting authority of the higher education segments, particularly the UC, inconsistent with the 2016 Budget Act requirement for the Regents of the UC to implement measures to reduce the university’s cost structure?
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
- The CSU indicates that with total service contracts of approximately $500 million per year, it could see higher bids in the range of 10 percent to 30 percent by contractors who wish to cover their increased risk. Assuming one-quarter of its contracts used some sort of secondary services overseas, CSU estimates that the increased bid amounts could range from $12.5 million to $37.5 million annually. These costs would increase if there is a higher percentage of such contracts. CSU also indicates that this bill increases the likelihood of employee/union complaints. Assuming just 10 complaints that result in arbitration hearings, the cost to the CSU would be $300,000 per year.
- UC anticipates that the overall costs from the expanded administrative requirements, increased staffing, legal expenses, and higher costs of contracts would range from $2 million to $5 million, with the potential for larger fiscal impacts in the longer term to the extent that future contract invalidations discourage suppliers from bidding on UC contracts or they encourage the submission of higher bid amounts as an effort to hedge against invalidation risk.
California State University Employees Union (co-source)
UPTE-CWA Local 9119 (co-source)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association
California Professional Firefighters
California School Employees Association
Communication Workers of America
Union of American Physicians and Dentists
OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/11/17)
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 59-18, 5/30/17
AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Arambula, Berman, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Cervantes, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dababneh, Daly, Frazier, Friedman, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gomez, Gonzalez Fletcher, Gray, Grayson, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Levine, Limón, Low, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Waldron, Weber, Wood, Rendon
NOES: Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Chávez, Chen, Dahle, Flora, Fong, Harper, Kiley, Lackey, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, Melendez, Obernolte, Steinorth, Voepel
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chau, Choi, Eggman
9/12/17 9:34:11
Office of Senate Floor Analyses (916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478 | AB |
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 848
Amended: 9/1/17 in Senate
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 6-0, 7/5/17
AYES: Allen, Wilk, Galgiani, Leyva, Pan, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Mendoza
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 9/1/17
AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Bradford, Hill, Wiener
NOES: Nielsen
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 59-18, 5/30/17 - See last page for vote
SOURCE: California State University Employees Union
UPTE-CWA Local 9119
DIGEST:
This bill prohibits the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) from contracting for services performed by workers outside of the United States that would displace a UC or CSU employment position.
Existing law:
- Requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts.
- Prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California.
- Imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in the above certification.
- Requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance, and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
This bill:
- Requires contractors and subcontractors to certify under penalty of perjury in their bids that work will be performed solely with workers in the United States.
- Prohibits the UC and the CSU from training service contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad as part of the contract, if it would displace an employment position.
- Requires the contract to be terminated if the contractor or subcontractor uses workers outside of the United States during the life of the contract, if that contract displaces an employment position, and sets a method for calculating penalties.
- Defines “displace” to mean the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee position.
- Defines “employee position” to mean the position of a career employee, permanent employee, or limited-term employee.
- Exempts UC and CSU study abroad programs from the requirements of this bill.
- Exempts contracts from the requirements of this bill if they would violate a specified World Trade Organization Agreement.
Comments
- Need for the bill. According to the author, “The United States has lost nearly 5 million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country. In 2004, the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) offshored its medical transcription services to a company in Pakistan. However, the contractor, disappointed with her pay, attempted to extort the school by threatening to release all private medical data onto the internet if she was not compensated fairly. Fortunately, the issue was resolved without incident.
Recently in July of 2016, UCSF offshored 17% of its IT services to a company called HCL—a contracting company out of India. UCSF’s contract with HCL is for 5-years and worth $50 million. UCSF asserts that outsourcing would save them $30 million over the next 5 years. Employees were warned of the possibility of outsourcing, but were eventually given a lay off date of February 28, 2017 and told to train their own replacements.
The University of California is establishing a precarious precedent by contracting out good paying, middle class IT jobs, not only out of California, but to a foreign country. State funding should not be used to fund contractors and subcontractors such as HCL, at the expense of taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and California.”
- India-based offshoring by UCSF and potentially all other UC campuses. According to UCSF, the campus faces difficult circumstances because of the Affordable Healthcare Act, which has increased the volume of patients but limits reimbursement to around 55 cents on the dollar. Over the past five years, which saw the advent of electronic medical records, IT has moved from being responsible for three percent of operating expenses to six percent. That includes more spending on IT security and analytics.
UCSF’s contract with HCL resulted in the loss of 49 IT career positions and the elimination of 48 other positions that were either vacant or filled by contracted staff, and constitutes a 17 percent reduction in IT staffing.
The UCSF indicated that all impacted UCSF career employees received six-months advance notice of intention to terminate, and that per UC policy the employees are eligible for job placement assistance, including assistance in finding other positions from across the UC system. If the employees do not find alternative employment within the UC system, they may also be eligible for severance to assist in their transition. UCSF noted that between five campuses and the UC Office of the President, more than 100 IT positions have already been identified as open and available.
The contract for services between HCL Technologies and UCSF provides all of the other 10 UC campuses, which serve about 240,000 students and employ about 190,000 faculty and staff, with the opportunity to take advantage of the same outsourced IT support services. According the sponsors of this bill, applying the same 17 percent loss ratio across UC's 10 campuses and five medical centers could result in a total of 613 lost positions.
- Policy tradeoffs to consider. As numerous reports on offshoring services have noted in recent years, legislation restricting its use related to state contracts involves a number of tradeoffs. Specifically, restrictions on government contracting can increase costs as workers at risk of being displaced by offshoring tend to be relatively skilled and have a history of relatively high wages. To the extent that restrictions on UC and CSU contracts mean the segments will pay more for certain services than they otherwise could, the segments will have less money for other purposes, such as financial aid or increased course offerings. Further, is restricting the contracting authority of the higher education segments, particularly the UC, inconsistent with the 2016 Budget Act requirement for the Regents of the UC to implement measures to reduce the university’s cost structure?
- Concerns from the segments. The UC has expressed concerns that the definitions of “displace” and “employment position” continue to create circumstances in which certification, contract termination, and related costs would be incurred. According to CSU, they do not offshore jobs and, per the Government Code and collective bargaining agreements, they are prohibited from displacing represented employees. Even so, CSU is concerned that this bill too broadly defines “employment positions”, which would have unintended consequences related to their ability to contract with national vendors.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
- The CSU indicates that with total service contracts of approximately $500 million per year, it could see higher bids in the range of 10 percent to 30 percent by contractors who wish to cover their increased risk. Assuming one-quarter of its contracts used some sort of secondary services overseas, CSU estimates that the increased bid amounts could range from $12.5 million to $37.5 million annually. These costs would increase if there is a higher percentage of such contracts. CSU also indicates that the bill would increase the likelihood of employee/union complaints. Assuming just 10 complaints that result in arbitration hearings, the cost to the CSU would be $300,000 per year.
- UC anticipates that the overall costs from the expanded administrative requirements, increased staffing, legal expenses, and higher costs of contracts would range from $2 million to $5 million, with the potential for larger fiscal impacts in the longer term to the extent that future contract invalidations discourage suppliers from bidding on UC contracts or they encourage the submission of higher bid amounts as an effort to hedge against invalidation risk.
California State University Employees Union (co-source)
UPTE-CWA Local 9119 (co-source)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association
California Professional Firefighters
California School Employees Association
Communication Workers of America
Union of American Physicians and Dentists
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 59-18, 5/30/17
AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Arambula, Berman, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Cervantes, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dababneh, Daly, Frazier, Friedman, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gomez, Gonzalez Fletcher, Gray, Grayson, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Levine, Limón, Low, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Waldron, Weber, Wood, Rendon
NOES: Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Chávez, Chen, Dahle, Flora, Fong, Harper, Kiley, Lackey, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, Melendez, Obernolte, Steinorth, Voepel
NO VOTE RECORDED: Chau, Choi, Eggman
9/6/17 9:10:09
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2017 - 2018 Regular Session
AB 848 (McCarty) - Public contracts: University of California: California State University: domestic workers
Version: July 12, 2017 | Policy Vote: ED. 6 - 0 |
Urgency: No | Mandate: Yes |
Hearing Date: September 1, 2017 | Consultant: Lenin Del Castillo |
Bill Summary:
This bill prohibits the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) from contracting for services performed by workers outside of the United States that would displace a UC or CSU employment position.
*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********
The following information is revised to reflect amendments
adopted by the committee on September 1, 2017
Fiscal Impact:
- The CSU indicates that with total service contracts of approximately $500 million per year, it could see higher bids in the range of 10 percent to 30 percent by contractors who wish to cover their increased risk. Assuming one-quarter of its contracts used some sort of secondary services overseas, CSU estimates that the increased bid amounts could range from $12.5 million to $37.5 million annually. These costs would increase if there is a higher percentage of such contracts. CSU also indicates that the bill would increase the likelihood of employee/union complaints. Assuming just 10 complaints that result in arbitration hearings, the cost to the CSU would be $300,000 per year.
- The UC anticipates that the overall costs from the expanded administrative requirements, increased staffing, legal expenses, and higher costs of contracts would range from $2 million to $5 million, with the potential for larger fiscal impacts in the longer term to the extent that future contract invalidations discourage suppliers from bidding on UC contracts or they encourage the submission of higher bid amounts as an effort to hedge against invalidation risk.
Author Amendments:
Modify the definition of employment position to be limited to career, permanent, and limited-term positions.
-- END --
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2017 - 2018 Regular Session
AB 848 (McCarty) - Public contracts: University of California: California State University: domestic workers
Version: July 12, 2017 | Policy Vote: ED. 6 - 0 |
Urgency: No | Mandate: Yes |
Hearing Date: August 21, 2017 | Consultant: Lenin Del Castillo |
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary:
This bill prohibits the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) from contracting for services performed by workers outside of the United States that would displace a UC or CSU employment position.
Fiscal Impact:
- UC anticipates that the overall costs from the expanded administrative requirements, increased staffing, legal expenses, and higher costs of contracts would range from $2 million to $5 million, with the potential for larger fiscal impacts in the longer term to the extent that future contract invalidations discourage suppliers from bidding on UC contracts or they encourage the submission of higher bid amounts as an effort to hedge against invalidation risk.
- The CSU indicates that with total service contracts of approximately $500 million per year, it could see higher bids in the range of 10 percent to 30 percent by contractors who wish to cover their increased risk. Assuming one-quarter of its contracts used some sort of secondary services overseas, CSU estimates that the increased bid amounts could range from $12.5 million to $37.5 million annually. These costs would increase if there is a higher percentage of such contracts. CSU also indicates that the bill would increase the likelihood of employee/union complaints. Assuming just 10 complaints that result in arbitration hearings, the cost to the CSU would be $300,000 per year.
Background:
Existing law requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. It also prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. The law imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in the certification. Further, existing law requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance, and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
Proposed Law:
This bill prohibits the UC and CSU, on or after July 1, 2017, from contracting for services that would displace an employment position within the UC or CSU unless that contractor and subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in their bid that work will be performed solely with workers in the United States. Further, this bill prohibits the UC and the CSU from expending funds to train service contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad as part of the contract, if that service contract would displace an employment position.
This bill requires the contract to be terminated for noncompliance if the contractor or subcontractor uses workers outside of the United States during the life of the contract, if that contract displaces an employment position, and sets a method for calculating penalties to be paid to the UC or CSU.
This bill defines “displace” to mean the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee position that occurs within 24 months of the date of the commencement of the operation of a contract, and defines “employee position” to mean the position of a career employee, temporary employee, casual employee, seasonal employee, limited-term employee, per diem employee, contracted-out employee, or a vacant employee.
This bill exempts UC and CSU study abroad programs, teaching, research, or public service activities and projects, and contracts that would violate a specified World Trade Organization Agreement.
Related Legislation:
SB 574 (Lara) modifies requirements for qualifying as a lowest responsible bidder or best value awardee for certain types of service contracts at the UC.
Staff Comments: To the extent that the restrictions will result in the segments having to pay more for certain contracts and services that employ only U.S. workers, UC and CSU will have less money for other purposes, such as financial aid or increasing course offerings. UC anticipates that its campuses would have to modify their existing procurement processes related to contracts, and both UC and contractors would have to engage in the certification process regarding whether a contract would result in the displacement of workers. Additional UC staff and potentially other investments (e.g. technology) would be needed to effectively monitor all potential displacement situations regarding contracts subject to the bill, for the first 24 months of the contract. Further, because contractors could be liable for employees that are displaced, it is likely that they would increase their bids by unknown amounts. There could be a reduction in the number of bids all together due to the liability that contractors would incur, which could lead to additional increases in bids.
-- END --
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Senator Benjamin Allen, Chair
2017 - 2018 Regular
Bill No: AB 848 Hearing Date: July 5, 2017
Author: | |||
Version: | June 26, 2017 | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | Yes |
Consultant: | Ian Johnson | ||
Subject: Public contracts: University of California: California State University: domestic workers
SUMMARY
This bill prohibits the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) from contracting for services performed by workers outside of the United States that would displace a UC or CSU employment position.
BACKGROUND
Existing law:
- Requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts.
- Prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California.
- Imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in the above certification.
- Also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance, and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
ANALYSIS
This bill:
- Requires contractors and subcontractors to certify under penalty of perjury in their bids that work will be performed solely with workers in the United States.
- Prohibits the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) from training service contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad as part of the contract, if it would displace an employment position.
- Requires the contract to be terminated if the contractor or subcontractor uses workers outside of the United States during the life of the contract, if that contract displaces an employment position, and sets a method for calculating penalties.
- Defines “displace” to mean the layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification or location, or time base reduction of an employee position.
- Defines “employee position” to mean the position of a career employee, temporary employee, casual employee, seasonal employee, limited-term employee, per diem employee, contracted-out employee, or a vacant employee.
- Exempts University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) study abroad programs from the requirements of this bill.
- Exempts contracts from the requirements of this bill if they would violate a specified World Trade Organization Agreement.
STAFF COMMENTS
- Need for the bill. According to the author, “The United States has lost nearly 5 million manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years, with at least 40 percent of these jobs outsourced to a foreign country. In 2004, the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) offshored its medical transcription services to a company in Pakistan. However, the contractor, disappointed with her pay, attempted to extort the school by threatening to release all private medical data onto the internet if she was not compensated fairly. Fortunately, the issue was resolved without incident.
Recently in July of 2016, UCSF offshored 17% of its IT services to a company called HCL—a contracting company out of India. UCSF’s contract with HCL is for 5-years and worth $50 million. UCSF asserts that outsourcing would save them $30 million over the next 5 years. Employees were warned of the possibility of outsourcing, but were eventually given a lay off date of February 28, 2017 and told to train their own replacements.
The University of California is establishing a precarious precedent by contracting out good paying, middle class IT jobs, not only out of California, but to a foreign country. State funding should not be used to fund contractors and subcontractors such as HCL, at the expense of taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and California.”
- India-based offshoring by UCSF and potentially all other UC campuses. According to UCSF, the campus faces difficult circumstances because of the Affordable Healthcare Act, which has increased the volume of patients but limits reimbursement to around 55 cents on the dollar. Over the past five years, which saw the advent of electronic medical records, IT has moved from being responsible for 3 percent of operating expenses to 6 percent. That includes more spending on IT security and analytics.
University of California San Francisco (UCSF’s) contract with HCL resulted in the loss of 49 IT career positions and the elimination of 48 other positions that were either vacant or filled by contracted staff, and constitutes a 17 percent reduction in IT staffing.
The UCSF indicated that all impacted UCSF career employees received six-months advance notice of intention to terminate, and that per University of California (UC) policy the employees are eligible for job placement assistance, including assistance in finding other positions from across the UC system. If the employees do not find alternative employment within the UC system, they may also be eligible for severance to assist in their transition. UCSF noted that between five campuses and the UC Office of the President, more than 100 IT positions have already been identified as open and available.
The contract for services between HCL Technologies and UCSF provides all of the other 10 UC campuses, which serve about 240,000 students and employ about 190,000 faculty and staff, with the opportunity to take advantage of the same outsourced IT support services. According the sponsors of this bill, applying the same 17 percent loss ratio across UC's 10 campuses and five medical centers could result in a total of 613 lost positions.
- Policy tradeoffs to consider. As numerous reports on offshoring services have noted in recent years, legislation restricting its use related to state contracts involves a number of tradeoffs. Specifically, restrictions on government contracting can increase costs as workers at risk of being displaced by offshoring tend to be relatively skilled and have a history of relatively high wages. To the extent that restrictions on UC and California State University (CSU) contracts mean the segments will pay more for certain services than they otherwise could, the segments will have less money for other purposes, such as financial aid or increased course offerings. Further, is restricting the contracting authority of the higher education segments, particularly the UC, inconsistent with the 2016 Budget Act requirement for the Regents of the UC to implement measures to reduce the university’s cost structure?
- Concerns from the segments. The UC has expressed several concerns with this bill as currently drafted. First, it is unclear whether this bill applies to contracts that have already been executed, such as UCSF’s contract with HCL, or if the bill’s prohibition would be implemented prospectively. Second, UC performs activities internationally other than their study abroad programs, such as teaching, research, or other public service activities and projects that could be adversely affected by this bill. Third, the bill does not specify a time period for determining whether a service contract resulted in an employee position being displaced.
According to California State University (CSU), they do not offshore jobs and, per the Government Code and collective bargaining agreements, they are prohibited from displacing represented employees. Even so, CSU is concerned that the bill too broadly defines “employment positions”, which would have unintended consequences related to their ability to contract with national vendors. For example, the desktop provider for the CSU uses secondary support services offshore. In its current form, the bill would severely limit the pool of qualified contractors, potentially compelling the CSU to contract with less qualified and more expensive vendors.
Given the author’s stated intent of the bill, and that addressing each of the concerns raised by the segments would prevent unintended consequences, staff recommends that the bill be amended to: (1) specify that neither the University of California (UC) or CSU may contract for services with a contractor or subcontractor, where that contract displaces an employment position, on or after July 1, 2017, (2) add teaching, research, or public service activities and projects to the list of international activities that the bill does not prohibit, (3) add language establishing up to a one-year time period for determining whether a contract for services results in a UC or CSU employment position being displaced, and (4) narrow the definition of “employment position” to include career or permanent employees.
SUPPORT
UPTE-CWA Local 9119 (co-sponsor)
California State University Employees Union (co-sponsor)
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association
California Professional Firefighters
California School Employees Association
Communication Workers of America
Union of American Physicians and Dentists
OPPOSITION
None received
-- END --
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
ATR Bill Id:AB 848
Author:(McCarty)
As Amended Ver:April 19, 2017
Majority vote
Committee | Votes | Ayes | Noes |
Higher Education | 8-4 | Medina, Arambula, Bloom, Irwin, Low, Quirk-Silva, Santiago, Weber | Baker, Chávez, Choi, Kiley |
Accountability | 4-2 | Eggman, Burke, Frazier, Medina | Lackey, Flora |
Appropriations | 14-3 | Gonzalez Fletcher, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta, Brough, Calderon, Chau, Eggman, Friedman, Gallagher, Eduardo Garcia, Gray, Muratsuchi, Reyes | Bigelow, Fong, Obernolte |
SUMMARY: Prohibits the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) from contracting for services when the contract would displace UC or CSU career employees.
EXISTING LAW:
- Requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. (Public Contracting Code (PCC) Section 10180 et seq.)
- Prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. (PCC Section 12140)
- Imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in the above certification. (PCC Section 12140)
- Also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance, and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract. (PCC Section 12140)
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, there will be unknown costs to the UC for both legal and administrative activities. UC anticipates that campuses would have to modify existing procurement processes related to contracts, and both UC and contractors would have to engage in the certification process regarding whether a contract would result in displacement of career employees. Legal costs could also be incurred to the extent that there are any situations where a certification is called into question during the life of a contract. CSU expects no fiscal impact.
COMMENTS: Purpose. This bill is intended to combat the outsourcing of United States (U.S.) jobs to foreign countries and foreign workers, a phenomenon known as "offshoring." The author argues that "…AB 848 would prohibit the offshoring of [UC] and [CSU] jobs to foreign countries. This bill would prohibit the UC and CSU from using state funds for services, unless the contractor certifies that the work will be performed solely with workers within the United States. In addition, this bill would prohibit both the segments from using state funds to train contract employees that plan to relocate to a foreign country."
Background. In November, 2016 UC San Francisco (UCSF) announced that they had "…entered into contracts with outside vendors for specified IT services, a move that will save the university more than $30 million over five years and allow it to meet sharply increased demands for IT capacity and strength, while improving cyber security."
UCSF's contract with outside vendors resulted in the loss of 49 IT career positions and the elimination of 48 other positions that were either vacant or filled by contracted staff, and constitutes a 17% reduction in IT staffing.
UCSF noted that the clinical component of the university, UCSF Health, is self-supporting and receives no state funding. The $30 million in savings realized over the course of UCSF's five year contract with HCL Technologies, an Indian outsourcing firm that is one of UCSF's three IT vendors, represents .01% of UCSF's $5.8 billion budget in 2015-2016. The LA Times reported that UCSF Health recorded a $42 million deficit in 2015-2016, in part as a byproduct of implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
UCSF indicated that all impacted UCSF career employees received six-months advance notice of intention to terminate, and that per UC policy the employees are eligible for job placement assistance including assistance in finding other positions from across the UC system. If the employees do not find alternative employment within the UC system, they may also be eligible for severance to assist in their transition. UCSF noted that between five campuses and the UC Office of the President, more than 100 IT positions have already been identified as open and available.
The contract for services between HCL Technologies and UCSF provides other UC campuses with an opportunity to take advantage of the same outsourced IT support services. According the measure's sponsor, the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE)-CWA Local 9119, applying the same 17% loss ratio across UC's 10 campuses and five medical centers could result in a total of 613 lost positions. UC Berkeley, UC Los Angles, and UC San Diego could each lose over 100 career IT positions.
Examples of offshoring. Though UCSF's decision to contract out their IT services with HCL Technologies is precedent-setting for California's higher education institutions, there have been many recent examples of major companies working with vendors that use similar models. In October 2014, Disney announced the layoff of 250 IT employees after Disney entered into a contract with HCL America. Of those laid off, 120 took new jobs at Disney, and about 40 retired or left the company before the end of the transition period, while about 90 did not find new Disney jobs.
In April 2014, Southern California Edison (SCE) announced it would be laying off 400-500 IT workers at its Irwindale, California location. SCE has also stated that an additional 100 employees would be leaving voluntarily. The 500 lost jobs reportedly represent just over a quarter to a third of the SCE Irwindale facility IT workforce of 1,500 to 1,800 employees.
In 2015, news reports in the Los Angeles Times, and other outlets, surfaced that SCE was replacing laid-off workers with outsourced contracted workers from two Indian companies, Infosys and Tata. Some of these news reports included claims by SCE laid off workers that they were being asked to train their replacements who were in the country on H-1B visas.
H-1B Visas. H-1B visas were introduced by the federal government in 1990, and over the years the annual cap on them has ranged up to 195,000, and currently stands at 65,000 (plus 20,000 for individuals with master's degrees). Under federal law, visa users must have specialized training or a bachelor's degree in the subject for which they are being hired. The visa holder must be offered the prevailing wage for the work, and they can only take jobs for which employers could not find a qualified American worker.
The New York Times reported that in 2014, 13 outsourcing firms accounted for one-third of all H-1B visas. In many cases, their employees are paid slightly more than the $60,000-a-year minimum salary required by the visa program for dependent companies seeking a waiver from having to recruit Americans first, but less than what American technology workers make.
Lawmakers and the public have raised concerns about potential abuses with the H-1B visa program after several news reports have noted the potential widespread abuse of the program by companies who are looking to reduce their costs at the expense of American workers. Many of these news stories have included claims by laid off employees that they are required to train their replacements who are H-1B visa holders in exchange for their severance or other benefits package, and/or on condition of confidentiality. At UCSF, the New York Times reported that employees losing their positions had to attend "knowledge transfer sessions" where HCL staff members in India were trained via videoconference - by the employees – on how to do their new jobs.
In March 2015, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on "Immigration Reforms Needed to Protect Skilled American Workers." The hearing focused on the H-1B visa program, the ability to bring high-skilled workers in the country to help companies compete, but also noted concerns with stories of abuse by employers who are displacing American workers in a manner inconsistent with the requirements or intent of the visa program.
Committee staff notes that, while H1-B visa holders were brought in on a temporary basis, UCSF has indicated that neither it nor HCL plan to replaced their laid-off workers with H1-B visa holders.
Related legislation: SB 574 (Lara) of the current legislative session, pending in Senate Appropriations, modifies the requirements for qualifying as a lowest responsible bidder or best value awardee for contracts for specified types of service contacts at the UC.
SB 959 (Lara) of 2016, and SB 376 (Lara) of 2015, which were substantively similar to SB 574, were vetoed.
AB 853 (Hernández) of 2015, was held on the Senate Floor. This bill requires an electrical and gas investor-owned utility to utilize employees of the utility for any work associated with the design, engineering, and operation of its nuclear, electrical and gas infrastructure, unless the utility has prior approval from the California Public Utilities Commission to contract out that work.
AB 1829 (Liu) of 2004, was vetoed. This bill would have prohibited a state agency or local government, as defined, from allocating or expending state funds for employment training for employees located in foreign countries.
Analysis Prepared by: Kevin J. Powers / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN: 0000341
Date of Hearing: May 10, 2017
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 848
Author:(McCarty) – As Amended Ver:April 19, 2017
Policy Committee: | Higher Education | Vote: | 8 - 4 |
Accountability and Administrative Review | 4 - 2 | ||
|
|
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY:
This bill prohibits University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) from contracting for services when the contract would displace UC or CSU career employees with workers outside of the United States (US). Specifically, this bill:
- Requires contractors and subcontractors to certify under penalty of perjury in their bids that work will be performed solely with workers in the US.
- Prohibits UC and CSU from training contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad as part of the contract, if it would displace their career employees.
- Requires the contract to be terminated if the contractor or subcontractor uses workers outside of the US during the life of the contract, if that contract displaces a career employee, and sets a method for calculating penalties.
- Exempts UC and CSU study abroad programs from the requirements of this bill.
- Exempts contracts from the requirements of this bill if they would violate a specified World Trade Organization Agreement.
FISCAL EFFECT:
- Unknown costs to the UC for both legal and administrative activities. UC anticipates that campuses would have to modify existing procurement processes related to contracts, and both UC and contractors would have to engage in the certification process regarding whether a contract would result in displacement of career employees. Legal costs could also be incurred to the extent that there are any situations where a certification is called into question during the life of a contract.
- Negligible fiscal impact to CSU. CSU expects no fiscal impact.
COMMENTS:
- Background and Purpose. Existing law prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. State law imposes a civil penalty for knowingly providing false information in the above certification.
According to the sponsors, this bill is meant to combat the offshoring of US jobs. Sponsors note instances in which the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) has entered into contracts that included workers outside of the US. Most recently, in 2016, UCSF entered into information Technology (IT) contracts with outside vendors that included foreign workers. According to a UCSF statement, the university expects to save more than $30 million over five years ($6 million annually) through this approach, which resulted in the loss of 49 UCSF career positions as well as the elimination of additional vacant positions.
UCSF stated that it gave career employees six months of notice of the intention to terminate and provided them job placement assistance, including access to other positions within the UC system. The author explains that this contract set a dangerous precedent and that the state should not fund work abroad at the expense of California jobs. According to the author," AB 848 will hold our public higher education segments accountable by preventing the offshoring of middle class jobs to foreign countries. Taxpayer dollars should be used to support jobs in California and in the U.S., not foreign countries." This bill exempts requirements for UC and CSU study abroad programs, which by their nature involve workers outside of the US.
- Related Legislation. SB 574 (Lara) modifies the requirements for qualifying as a lowest responsible bidder or best value awardee for contracts for specified types of service contracts at the UC. This bill is currently on the Senate Appropriations Suspense.
AB 1829 (Liu), of the 2004 Legislative Session, would have prohibited a state agency or local government, as defined, from allocating or expending state funds for employment training for employees located in foreign countries. The bill was vetoed by the Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Analysis Prepared by: Daisy Gonzales / APPR. / (916) 319-2081
Date of Hearing: April 26, 2017
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ACCOUNTABILITY AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
Susan Talamantes Eggman, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 848 (
Author:McCarty) – As Amended Ver:April 19, 2017
SUBJECT: Public contracts: University of California: California State University: domestic workers
SUMMARY: Prohibits University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) from contracting for services when the contract would displace UC or CSU career employees with workers outside of the United States (US). Specifically, this bill:
- Requires contractors and subcontractors to certify under penalty of perjury in their bids that work will be performed solely with workers in the US.
- Prohibits UC and CSU from training contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad as part of the contract, if it would displace their career employees.
- Requires the contract to be terminated if the contractor or subcontractor uses workers outside of the US during the life of the contract, if that contract displaces a career employee, and sets a method for calculating penalties.
- Exempts UC and CSU study abroad programs from the requirements of this bill.
- Exempts contracts from the requirements of this bill if they would violate a specified World Trade Organization Agreement.
EXISTING LAW:
- Requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts.
- Prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California.
- Imposes a civil penalty for knowingly providing false information in the above certification.
- Requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: This bill prohibits UC and CSU from contracting for services abroad that would displace their career employees. Contractors and subcontractors would be required to certify under penalty of perjury that work will be performed solely by workers in the US.
According to the sponsors, this bill is meant to combat the offshoring of US jobs. Sponsors note instances in which the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) has entered into contracts that included workers outside of the US.
In 2016, UCSF entered into information Technology (IT) contracts with outside vendors that included foreign workers. According to a UCSF statement, the university expects to save more than $30 million over five years through this approach, which resulted in the loss of 49 UCSF career positions as well as the elimination of additional vacant positions.
UCSF stated that it gave career employees six months of notice of the intention to terminate and provided them job placement assistance, including access to other positions within the UC system.
The author explains that this contract set a dangerous precedent and that the state should not fund work abroad at the expense of California jobs. According to the author," AB 848 will hold our public higher education segments accountable by preventing the offshoring of middle class jobs to foreign countries. Taxpayer dollars should be used to support jobs in California and in the U.S., not foreign countries."
In addition to banning contracts for work abroad, this bill prohibits UC or CSU from training contract employees in foreign countries or those who plan to relocate abroad if doing so would displace career employees.
If a contractor or subcontractor does use workers outside of the US during the term of the contract, this bill requires the contract to be terminated for noncompliance. Additionally, contractors and subcontractors would have to pay penalties to the respective university equal to the amount paid by the university for the percent of work performed with workers outside of the US.
This bill exempts requirements for UC and CSU study abroad programs, which by their nature involve workers outside of the US.
The current version of this bill incorporates amendments agreed to in the Assembly Higher Education Committee that narrowed the application of requirements. Those amendments prohibit contracts that would displace career employees only, and exempt study abroad programs.
DOUBLE REFERRAL: This bill was heard in the Assembly Committee on Higher Education on April 18, 2017, with a vote of 8-4.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California State University Employees Union – SEIU Local 2579 (sponsor)
University Professional and Technical Employees – CWA Local 9119 (sponsor)
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
Communications Workers of America, 9th District
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by: Scott Herbstman / A. & A.R. / (916) 319-3600
Date of Hearing: April 18, 2017
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Jose Medina, Chair
ABPCA Bill Id:AB 848 (
Author:McCarty) – As Amended Ver:April 5, 2017
[Note: This bill is doubled referred to the Assembly Accountability and Administrative Review Committee and will be heard by that Committee as it relates to issues under its jurisdiction.]
SUBJECT: Public contracts: University of California: California State University: domestic workers
SUMMARY: Restricts the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) from entering into contracts for services if those services will not be completed by workers in the United States. Specifically, this bill:
- Prohibits the UC, as a condition of receiving state funding, and the CSU:
- From contracting for services with a contractor or subcontractor unless that contractor or subcontractor certifies under penalty of perjury in his or her bid for the contact that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers within the United States; and,
- From allocating or expending funds for employment training for employees located in foreign countries.
- Specifies that the above provisions do not apply to a contract, if refusing to award that contract would violate the specific terms of federal trade treaties, as specified.
- Specifies that these provisions do not apply to agreements entered into by the Treasurer in connection with the sale of any evidence of indebtedness.
EXISTING LAW:
- Requires a state agency to comply with specified procedures in awarding agency contracts. (Public Contracting Code (PCC) Section 10180 et seq)
- Prohibits, with specified exceptions, a state agency authorized to enter into contracts relating to public benefit programs from contracting for services provided by a call center that directly serves applicants for, recipients of, or enrollees in, those public benefit programs unless the contractor or subcontractor certifies in its bid for the contract that the contract, and any subcontract performed under that contract, will be performed solely with workers employed in California. (PCC Section 12140)
- Imposes a civil penalty, as provided, for knowingly providing false information in the above certification. (PCC Section 12140)
- Also requires the contract to include a clause providing for a right by the state to terminate the contract for noncompliance, and specified penalties, if the contractor or subcontractor performs the contract or the subcontract with workers not employed in California during the life of the contract. (PCC Section 12140)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: Purpose. This bill is intended to combat the outsourcing of U.S. jobs to foreign countries and foreign workers, a phenomenon known as "offshoring." The author argues that "…AB 848 would prohibit the offshoring of [UC] and [CSU] jobs to foreign countries. This bill would prohibit the UC and CSU from using state funds for services, unless the contractor certifies that the work will be performed solely with workers within the United States. In addition, this bill would prohibit both the segments from using state funds to train contract employees that plan to relocate to a foreign country."
Background. In November, 2016 UC San Francisco (UCSF) announced that they had “…entered into contracts with outside vendors for specified IT services, a move that will save the university more than $30 million over five years and allow it to meet sharply increased demands for IT capacity and strength, while improving cyber security.”
UCSF’s contract with outside vendors resulted in the loss of 49 IT career positions and the elimination of 48 other positions that were either vacant or filled by contracted staff, and constitutes a 17% reduction in IT staffing.
UCSF noted that the clinical component of the university, UCSF Health, is self-supporting and receives no state funding. The $30 million in savings realized over the course of UCSF’s five year contract with HCL Technologies, an Indian outsourcing firm that is one of UCSF’s three IT vendors, represents .01 percent of UCSF’s $5.8 billion budget in 2015-2016. The LA Times reported that UCSF Health recorded a $42 million deficit in 2015-2016, in part as a byproduct of implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
UCSF indicated that all impacted UCSF career employees received six-months advance notice of intention to terminate, and that per UC policy the employees are eligible for job placement assistance including assistance in finding other positions from across the UC system. If the employees do not find alternative employment within the UC system, they may also be eligible for severance to assist in their transition. UCSF noted that between five campuses and the UC Office of the President, more than 100 IT positions have already been identified as open and available.
The contract for services between HCL Technologies and UCSF provides other UC campuses with an opportunity to take advantage of the same outsourced IT support services. According the measure’s sponsor, the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE)-CWA Local 9119, applying the same 17% loss ratio across UC’s 10 campuses and five medical centers could result in a total of 613 lost positions. UC Berkeley, UC Los Angles, and UC San Diego could each lose over 100 career IT positions.
Examples of offshoring. Though UCSF’s decision to contract out their IT services with HCL Technologies is precedent-setting for California’s higher education institutions, there have been many recent examples of major companies working with vendors that use similar models. In October 2014, Disney announced the layoff of 250 IT employees after Disney entered into a contract with HCL America. Of those laid off, 120 took new jobs at Disney, and about 40 retired or left the company before the end of the transition period, while about 90 did not find new Disney jobs.
In April 2014, Southern California Edison (SCE) announced it would be laying off 400-500 IT workers at its Irwindale, California location. SCE has also stated that an additional 100 employees would be leaving voluntarily. The 500 lost jobs reportedly represent just over a quarter to a third of the SCE Irwindale facility IT workforce of 1,500 to 1,800 employees.
In 2015, news reports in the Los Angeles Times, and other outlets, surfaced that SCE was replacing laid-off workers with outsourced contracted workers from two Indian companies, Infosys and Tata. Some of these news reports included claims by SCE laid off workers that they were being asked to train their replacements who were in the country on H-1B visas.
H-1B Visas. H-1B visas were introduced by the federal government in 1990, and over the years the annual cap on them has ranged up to 195,000, and currently stands at 65,000 (plus 20,000 for individuals with master’s degrees). Under federal law, visa users must have specialized training or a bachelor’s degree in the subject for which they are being hired. The visa holder must be offered the prevailing wage for the work, and they can only take jobs for which employers could not find a qualified American worker.
The New York Times reported that in 2014, 13 outsourcing firms accounted for one-third of all H-1B visas. In many cases, their employees are paid slightly more than the $60,000-a-year minimum salary required by the visa program for dependent companies seeking a waiver from having to recruit Americans first, but less than what American technology workers make.
Lawmakers and the public have raised concerns about potential abuses with the H-1B visa program after several news reports have noted the potential widespread abuse of the program by companies who are looking to reduce their costs at the expense of American workers. Many of these news stories have included claims by laid off employees that they are required to train their replacements who are H-1B visa holders in exchange for their severance or other benefits package, and/or on condition of confidentiality. At UCSF, the New York Times reported that employees losing their positions had to attend “knowledge transfer sessions” where HCL staff members in India were trained via videoconference - by the employees – on how to do their new jobs.
In March 2015, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on “Immigration Reforms Needed to Protect Skilled American Workers.” The hearing focused on the H-1B visa program, the ability to bring high-skilled workers in the country to help companies compete, but also noted concerns with stories of abuse by employers who are displacing American workers in a manner inconsistent with the requirements or intent of the visa program.
Committee staff notes that, while H1-B visa holders were brought in on a temporary basis, UCSF has indicated that neither it nor HCL plan to replaced their laid-off workers with H1-B visa holders.
Arguments in support. The author writes that, “"…the state must prevent the abuse of public funds and ensure oversight of the use of tax payer dollars by our public universities. The [UC] is establishing a precarious precedent by contracting out good paying, middle class IT jobs, not only out of California, but to a foreign country.”
The California Labor Federation writes that “…offshoring has devastating impacts on our workforce and economy. California has lost hundreds of thousands of jobs and nation-wide job losses are in the tens of millions due to this practice. In addition to the widespread job losses, offshoring unfairly burdens taxpayers and our local safety net program while eroding labor standards and worker safety protections… state funding should not be used to fund contractors and subcontractors such as HCL, at the expense of taxpayer dollars to create jobs in foreign countries. State funds should be used to create jobs in the United States and in California.”
Concerns raised by the segments. The CSU writes that “…per the Government Code and collective bargaining agreements, the CSU is prohibited from displacing represented employees, which is defined to include layoff, demotion, involuntary transfer to a new classification, or change in location requiring change in residence and involuntary time base reductions. Second, the current language of the bill is so expansive that it would impact contracts and programs that we understand are beyond those intended by the author. For example, the CSU would be prohibited from engaging in international contracts such as study abroad agreements, which by their nature must be performed outside the United States. In addition, the realities of operation in a global economy are that many large U.S. vendors (often the best qualified and most cost-effective service providers) have divisions in countries outside of the U.S. that perform secondary services. Our desktop software provider, for example, uses secondary support services offshore. In its current form, the bill would severely limit the pool of qualified contractors, potentially compelling CSU to contract with less qualified and more expensive vendors. “
Related legislation: SB 574 (Lara, 2017), pending in Senate Appropriations, modifies the requirements for qualifying as a lowest responsible bidder or best value awardee for contracts for specified types of service contacts at the UC.
SB 959 (Lara, 2016), and SB 376 (Lara, 2015), which were substantively similar to SB 574, were vetoed.
AB 853 (Hernández, 2015), was held on the Senate Floor. This bill requires an electrical and gas investor-owned utility to utilize employees of the utility for any work associated with the design, engineering, and operation of its nuclear, electrical and gas infrastructure, unless the utility has prior approval from the California Public Utilities Commission to contract out that work.
AB 1829 (Liu, 2004), was vetoed. This bill would have prohibited a state agency or local government, as defined, from allocating or expending state funds for employment training for employees located in foreign countries.
Policy considerations: As presently drafted, the provisions of AB 848 broadly apply to any contract for services. By requiring contracted work to be completed solely by workers in the United States, AB 848 has the potential to impact study abroad programs, vendor contracts, and other services outside of the intent articulated by the author.
The committee recommends, and the author has agreed to accept, the following substantive amendments.
- The author has agreed to insert language into PCC Section 12147(a), PCC Section 12147(b), and PCC Section 12147(c) that clarifies that those provisions only apply to contracts where career UC and CSU employees are displaced.
As the provisions of AB 848 are in the PCC and address issues applicable to the “…university by statute for the letting of construction contracts, sales of real property, and purchasing of materials, goods, and services,” the UC is required under Article 9 of the California Constitution to follow the provisions of this legislation. Therefore, the committee recommends, and the author has agreed to accept, the following language:
- Strike all existing language in PCC Section 12147(e) regarding conditions on UC funding, and instead replace with language specifically exempting study abroad programs from the provisions of this bill.
The following technical changes have been proposed by the committee and agreed to by the author:
- Removal of any reference to the provisions of this bill in Section 5703 of the Government Code.
- Amending the intent language to reflect the estimated cost of outsourcing IT jobs be $1.36 billion dollars.
- Technical changes striking “contact that the” from PCC Section 12147(a) and adding the word “contract” before “…employees located in…” in PCC Section 12147(b)
Amendments note. In order to best meet Assembly deadlines, the amendments accepted by the author will be processed in the Assembly Accountability and Administrative Review Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association
Communication Workers of America
Union of American Physicians and Dentists
UPTE-CWA Local 9119 (Sponsor)
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by: Kevin J. Powers / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960
Discussed in Hearing
Assembly Floor
Senate Floor
Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
Senate Standing Committee on Education
Assembly Floor
Assembly Standing Committee on Appropriations
Assembly Standing Committee on Accountability and Administrative Review
Assembly Standing Committee on Higher Education
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):