Assembly Standing Committee on Labor and Employment

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Assembly Labor and Employment Committee hearing. Testimony is in person. We do accept written testimony through the Position Letter Portal on the Committee's website. We also have an email address set up that you can use to email us your testimony. Email is ALBR dot Committee at Assembly dot CA dot Gov. We do not have a quorum, and so we will begin as a Subcommitee. We don't have authors except for myself, and so I'm going to.

Assembly Member Chen, can you hang out for a minute for me to present? Well, you're going to stay where you are. You're going to say where you are. You can do it from your seat. Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. AB 58 would require the Department of Industrial Relations to include in its annual report on occupational injuries, diseases, and fatalities industry classification information separated by the ethnicity, race, and gender of affected individuals.

Collecting workplace injury data with demographic specific information helps to identify patterns and trends in workplace injuries and illnesses, which can then be used to develop targeted prevention strategies. By collecting this data, this bill will further help to promote workplace safety, identify and address potential discriminatory practices, and ensure legal compliance. I have no witnesses. Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Mr. Chair, do you have any, no additional witnesses? Do we have any witnesses in the audience in support? Any witness in the audience in opposition?

John Shaban, California Nurses, support.

Thank you. Thank you. Witnesses in opposition? Seeing no witnesses in opposition, I'll take it back to the Committee. Any questions for the Committee Members? With that, Madam Secretary, if you please call the roll. I'm sorry. We'll head back to when we have quorum.

I have one other item, but hold on one moment.

Yes, Mr. Chair.

You want me? Sure. Thank you. This chair does not work.

All right. Thank you, Assembly Member Chen. We did one of my bills.

We'll keep my other one for a little later, as we now do have another author here, Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan, who has two bills up, AB 521 and 1076. Would you like to start with 521?

1076.

All right.

No, no, it's okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Member. I'm proud to present AB 1076, which protects employee rights by prohibiting non-compete agreements in an employee's contract. Non-compete agreements are employment provisions that prohibit employees from joining or starting a competing enterprise within a certain time frame.

These provisions are unenforceable here in California under case law. But in spite of this, in California, about 45% of businesses still use these non-compete agreements. The bill requires employers to inform employees who are obliged to sign a non-compete agreement that the clause is void, as many individuals who enter into these agreements do not know they are unenforceable. These agreements seriously hurt low-wage workers.

According to the Economic Policy Institute, approximately 30% of establishments offering an average hourly wage below $13 require non-compete agreements for their workers. By stopping this practice, the FTC estimates that the wages could increase by nearly $300 billion per year and career opportunities would be expanded for 30 million Americans. The use of non-compete agreements is an exploitative process that deprives workers of fair compensation and stifles innovation. The bill, in addition, ensures that no future contracts contain these clauses. With me today in support of the bill is Terry... You pronounce your last name? Olle. California Campaign Director with the Economic Security Project Action.

Thank you. Thank you, Assembly Member. Thank you, Chair Kalra and Members. I'm Terry Olle with the Economic Security Project Action. I'm the California Campaign Director, and I'd like to thank the Assembly Member for authoring this important bill and your commitment to protecting employees from exploitation through non-compete agreements.

My organization advances policies that give people the freedom and stability to thrive, including reigning in corporate concentration that deters competition and deprives workers of bargaining power. We believe we're strongest when people who make up the economy are the authors of their own lives. But inequalities in wealth and power, rooted in structural racism and sexism and justified by outdated economic ideas, leave us all less secure and resilient, and we can make a different set of choices.

AB 1076 does exactly this, and I'm really proud to be supporting it. As the Member says, it advances competition and gives workers a fighting chance by codifying and strengthening the state's existing prohibition on non-competes. As you've heard, technically, noncompetes have been unenforceable in California since actually the late 1800s, and recently reinforced by the Supreme Court in 2008. However, many individuals still enter into these agreements, not aware of their legal rights, and believe the clause is enforceable.

Anecdotally, since I started working on this issue, I have found this to be true among my friends who believe that they've signed non-competes that can be enforced against them. So at a minimum, there's a fair bit of confusion about what's allowed. And of course, while businesses that offer high pay or require high levels of education are generally more likely to use non-competes, they're also quite common in workplaces where low pay and for workers that have fewer education credentials, as the Member just cited.

And of course, because of that, even though it's maybe common across incomes. The harm disproportionately falls on women and people of color who are often channeled into those lower wage jobs and feel they have less negotiating power to negotiate a better situation or to leave. And these folks are least likely to be able to assert their rights. As the Member said, non-competes unfairly smother competition by preventing employers from recruiting good talent.

And that, ultimately, not only hurts individuals, but it also chokes off broader economic productivity. So we are in strong support of AB 1076 to codify existing law and strengthen it and unequivocally shut the door on these practices. Thank you, and I urge your aye vote.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone here in the room that would like to express their support of AB 1076?

Justin Rausa, Office of Attorney General Bonta, in support. Thank you.

Thank you.

John Shaban, California Nurses Association. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 1076? That's not on the dais? Any questions or comments from my colleague? I want to thank the author for bringing this. I know that this is a really important issue. There's kind of a similar partner bill of sorts Senator McCarty is doing with the nurses that have to do with other mechanisms that are kind of like De facto non-compete.

But this, I think, really strikes at the heart of the matter of making it very clear what our policies are in California to ensure that non-compete agreements, whether consciously or not, are being exercised in our state. So thank you so much. Would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

All right, we will get to that when we have a quorum. But I know you do have one other bill. It's file item two, AB 521.

So whenever you're ready, you may proceed on that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair and Member. I'm proud to present AB 521 to ensure equal protections through restroom access on job sites. This is a daily challenge for women in the building trades, and it comes down to simply using the bathroom. This actually came out of a conversation I was having with an IBEW leader, a female leader in my district, who told me me, as we were chatting about what it was like to be the only woman on a work site. I said, how can we make things better? And she said, I wish you could just give me a bathroom. And I said, you know what? I think we can do that. And so this really came to be a problem when we decided to.

When we initiated the non-gender restroom policy, which is a good one, but in so doing, we got rid of women's restrooms on work sites, and women are really suffering as a result of that. The conditions are not up to par to make these work sites adequate for them to feel safe and comfortable. And so this bill urges Cal OSHA to revisit those standards for restrooms and to protect women in the trades by putting a women's restroom on job sites. With me in support today is Beverly Yu with the State Building and Construction Trades and Alysia Blakeman, an apprentice with Local 302, IBEW.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair and Members, Beverly Yu on behalf of State Building Construction Trades Council, representing half a million members statewide. We commend the author for bringing this bill forward. It's very important to us. According to the data from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards, Joint Labor Management building trades apprenticeship programs collectively graduate over 90% of women apprentices in California State approved apprenticeship system. A daily challenge for women in the building traits is restroom access. When women first entered the profession, restrooms were often used to exclude and bully the women on site. Now, though not as frequently used as a tool of intimidation, restrooms are still a barrier for many women who may face serious sanitary issues when using facilities.

Women are still underrepresented in the trades, which means they are often left out or face serious barriers on the job site. Every worker deserves a clean, secure place to use the restroom. Denying that by default to women on job sites put their health and safety at risk and reduces their chances of getting more women to join on the job site. So for those reasons, we strongly urge your support for this bill. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair and Committee. My name is Alysia, and I am a proud fourth year apprentice with the IBEW Local 302. I'm here today to express my profound support for AB 521 and to request that you join me in advocating for its approval. To help you understand the important impact that this bill would have, I would like to share with you some of my experiences as a woman in the trades. As a first year apprentice, I worked on a job site that provided coed restrooms.

One afternoon, I walked into the restroom to find that someone on the job site had written, quote, bang the Electrician bitch, yes or no, unquote. Other males on the job site would then put a tally mark indicating whether or not they would like to bang me. Having a separate restroom wouldn't have prevented these tasteless and hurtful words from being written. It would, however, have protected me from the embarrassment of knowing it existed and the fear of my safety that followed.

In my third year of the apprenticeship, I worked on a job site while seven and a half months pregnant, which, along with menstruation, is an experience faced uniquely by women. Given my physical state, the only work appropriate attire I could wear at the time were coveralls, so I had to completely disrobe in order to use the restroom, which I was doing every hour by that point. In my experience, men on construction sites are not concerned with the cleanliness of the restrooms.

In fact, they are absolutely disgusting. And without access to a separate restroom on that job site, I would not have been able to do my job. Situations like these are ones that women in my industry face on a daily basis, and we should not have to choose between the career that we love and our health, sanitation, and safety. AB 521 is a simple solution to a huge problem of restroom access and protection for women working in an overwhelmingly male industry. I respectfully encourage you to support AB 521.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 521? Please approach the microphone and name, organization, and your position on the bill.

Hi, my name is Rachel Shoemake. I'm with International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, IBEW 302, and I support this bill. Thank you so much. And for all women in construction. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Anyone else here in support?

My name is Shawn Robinson, and I'm just a concerned citizen, and I'm in support.

Thank you. Anyone else? Anyone here in opposition to AB 521? Any questions or comments from Committee Members? I'll just give an editorial comment that I agreed that quite often, men's bathrooms can be pretty disgusting. And with that, would you like to close?

Yeah. I just want to thank Alysia for being here, for sharing her experience. It's so important that we understand what women in the trades are dealing with every day. As I know, it is a shared priority for all of us to get more women access to those incredible jobs that will give them the life they deserve in California. And with that, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Absolutely. I really appreciate you for bringing this forward. When we get a quorum, we will certainly take it up. Thank you. Assembly Member Ortega. Oh, actually, we have Assembly Member Bryan here, of course. So, Assembly Member Bryan, file item five, AB 1224.

So whenever you're ready, come on up and get situated.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and colleagues. I'm here today to present AB 1224, a bill that will conduct the first California Green Job Survey in more than a decade, nearly 13 years. The climate commitment of 2022 forecasted that there will be 4 million green jobs over the next two decades. We're expanding and transitioning away from fossil fuels, pledging to workers that there will be viable, sustainable green economic alternative.

But we don't understand the jobs that exist now. We certainly don't understand the investments that we're making now in terms of their emergence into this new sector. Innovations in green technology have new jobs for the economy, but California has not recognized these new positions to complement our lived reality. We set goals for alternative fuel engines to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. Yet our job classifications do not consider green methods of production or distribution.

We can't train our green workforce without considering the tasks they must prepare for. And we cannot build our green workforce without identifying the jobs in it. Last weekend on Earth Day, we opened up the California Center for Climate Change Education at West LA College. It's the state's only center for climate change education in our entire community college system. It's right next to the Inglewood Oil Field, the largest urban oil field in the country.

And it's where our faculty are aiming to train students for the growing workforce. One in three young people don't know of an accessible job in the green economy. But here in California, we can bridge that gap, and it starts with better data. The people living in the shadows of our oil fields deserve to take part in our developing green industry. They and so many others across the state are ready to learn, but they need to know what's available to them.

In short, we haven't done a full landscape analysis of what green jobs are available or becoming available in over 13 years. We can't prepare for a labor force that is union represented, high road wage earners, and protected in all the right ways if we don't know where those emergence industries are coming from, we need to do that landscape analysis. We should do a new greens job survey.

To give testimony today, I'm joined by Daniel Ferguson, Director of the Workforce Development at the LA Cleantech Incubator, or LACI, and Kenneth Gonzalez, a workforce graduate from that same program.

Thank you very much, Mr. Bryan. Gentlemen, if you can wait 1 second, we're going to establish quorum because we have a lot of folks coming in and out. Want to make sure we get that done so we can actually vote on items this afternoon.

Kalra. Here. Flora. Here. Chen. Here. Haney. Ortega. Here. Reyes. Ward. Quorum established.

Thank you. So please proceed.

Thank you, Assembly Member Bryan. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. As Assembly Member Bryan mentioned, I'm Daniel Ferguson and I'm the Senior Director of Workforce Development at LACI. We're grateful to the California State Legislator's support helping us launch and scale our LACI's Green Job Workforce Development Programs. Since 2019, we have served over 270 participants. 88% have received industry recognized credentials. Approximately 70% of graduates are placed in jobs and are pursuing postsecondary education.

It has been a pleasure for our team to support individuals, many of whom are just starting to learn about the green economy, to acquire the necessary training to pursue high road green jobs. LACI released our Green Jobs Report in January 2021, researched by HR&A advisors and funded by the Los Angeles and California Workforce Development Boards. The report laid forth the course of action for the LA region to build a cleaner, greener, more inclusive economy.

The Green Job Report provides four key recommendations, accelerating economic recovery, bolstering the workforce pipeline, advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion, and clearly defining green jobs and tracking metrics. AB 1224 is inspired by the fourth key recommendation, which we believe will spur green job growth and provide transparency by updating classification codes to better reflect current industries and identify green jobs that exist in California. Information is fragmented and creates disparities and inequities for workers in historically marginalized communities.

As California prepares the current and future workforce for green jobs, the sure way to train, transition, and equip individuals for this green economy is to identify the skills to support private and public sector employers, classify the jobs as green, and provide opportunities for job seekers to find them. We certainly thank you for your consideration and collaboration on AB 1224.

Thank you very much. Please.

Good afternoon. My name is Kenneth Gonzalez. I am a graduate of LACI's Green Jobs, EV Maintenance, and Micro Mobility Training Programs. Upon completion, I learned that their world class advanced, I interned at their world class advanced prototyping center and got exposure to clean tech startups and emerging technologies. LACI provided me with access to an online learning platform and I'm proud to have earned over 34 certifications specifically in design, manufacturing, and maintenance. To date, I'm a Product Design Engineer Consultant for clean tech startups and working on an electric motorcycle prototype.

Prior to the Green Jobs Workforce Development Program, I was working in many unfulfilling, dead end jobs that my environment left me with no way out. I was provided with mentoring and the support needed to see my full potential. I started developing my skills in design and engineering in my free time.

One day, speaking about my electric motorcycle project to a mentor, a startup company overheard me and discovered that I have solved many of the same issues they were having and hired me to build their company prototype, landing me my first job as a Design Engineer in green technology. AB 1224 spoke to me because it sets the building blocks necessary for folks like me to explore green career pathways.

The bill is critical, as it will share the survey information through education, outreach, local workforce, and local workforce development centers. The truth is, I couldn't have navigated the market to where I am today without exactly what this bill is looking to facilitate, the building blocks necessary for the community to know their options.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 1224?

Afternoon. My name is Dr. Taj Eldridge. I'm a General Partner of Include Venture Partners, and I'm here to support AB 1224.

Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 1224? All right, we'll bring it back to the Committee for any questions or comments. A motion and a second. I want to thank the author for bringing this forward. We all know that we have to move towards a green economy future, but we can't do that with our eyes closed.

We really need to know what it means, and not just for our investors and private sector, but for government investment, as well as the trades, to know kind of, how to guide and lead their apprenticeship programs. So, as someone that is chairing the Select Committee on the Future of Work and Workers, I'm going to be very interested in seeing the results of the survey to help guide the work that we're doing here in this building as well. So, with that, would you like to close, sir?

Absolutely. I want to thank you, Mr. Chair, and the folks who came to testify today. Exactly. If we're going to invest in a green, sustainable future, we've got to know exactly what we're investing in and what that means for the growing job market and the workforce. We can't promise folks a just transition if we don't know where you're just transitioning into. Because the innovation that we're investing in isn't being captured in our current landscape of what green jobs are, can, and will be. This survey is going to help us get a better understanding of that so we can prepare for a future together. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, if we can call roll on the vote for AB 1224.

Motion is do pass to Appropriations. Kalra. Aye. Kalra, aye. Flora. Flora, aye. Chen. Haney. Ortega. Ortega, aye. Reyes. Ward.

Yeah, that bill will be on call and we'll wait to add some Members. Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there a motion on the consent calendar?

Madam Secretary, if we can have the roll on the consent calendar. On the consent calendar for AB 1370 and AB 1766, the motion is do pass consent to appropriations on AB 1767. The motion will be do pass consent to the Assembly floor. Flora, I mean, Cholera. Excuse me, Cholera? Aye. Flora. Aye. Flora, aye. Chen? Haney? Ortega? Ortega, aye. Rayes? Ward? Consent calendar will be placed on call. Senator Ortega, are you ready to proceed or actually, hold on one moment. I think we have summer Shiabo here.

Thank you. Yeah, just in time. This is item six, AB 1359. If you want to catch your breath and get settled in and whenever you're ready, let me get the right thing. Yeah. Get situated and then we'll get to you. Whenever you're ready. Thank you. Hello. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chair and Members, I am grateful for the opportunity to present AB 1359 to you today. I appreciate the work the Committee staff has done and happy to take amendments.

AB 139 will provide healthcare workers with seven protected sick days per year and the ability to defend themselves with civil action lawsuits. This will give healthcare workers appropriate amounts of time to recuperate when ill. Healthcare workers are required to work long hours in high stress environments while being exposed to infectious diseases, physical strain and mental exhaustion. It's incumbent on healthcare workers to ensure that they are able to perform their functions in service to their patients.

Yet when they need a rest day to help their bodies heal, they are limited and sometimes punished for doing so. California stepped in to give healthcare workers the proper supplemental leave during COVID and continue to renew it until its expiration date in December 2022. Even though COVID leave has come and gone, healthcare workers are still overworked and regularly exposed to.

You know, during COVID I was working for California Nurses Association, and I was talking with a lot of know some nurses who were being disciplined for staying out sick or bringing in their own PPE. And we know that the pandemic is known Covid is still real. People are still getting it. And we can't have healthcare workers feeling pressured to come into work when they're sick or possibly infectious and working with patients who have vulnerable immune systems.

So AB 1359 will supply them with the rest that they need the time to recover and recuperate and make sure that they are healthy and able to care for patients. And joining me today is labor and delivery nurse and Member of SEIU one to one RN, Jakita Linke. Jacinta Linke and also Matt Ledge. Yes. With California State Council. Okay, I'm trying not to butcher too many names today. Go ahead. Hi, good afternoon and thank you for having me here. My name is Jacinta Linka.

I'm a proud Member of SCIU, one to one RN. I've been a labor and delivery nurse for 32 years. I work at Hollywood Presbyterian Medical center in Los Angeles. I'm here today on behalf of all my brothers and sisters in the healthcare industry because we love our patients. But after working under the strain of the pandemic and years of chronic unsafe staffing in our hospitals, we are tired. The psychological scars that my colleagues suffered on the front lines will not heal for many years.

Hospitals across the country are bleeding nurses. I fear what will happen when they cannot be replaced, when there is simply no one there to care for our patients. At my hospital, nurses are aggressively questioned when they call off sick. Oftentimes, they are too afraid to call off at all. The pandemic is used as a hammer. We're told we're working under Covid ratios. Even though the State of emergency is officially over, the situation has repeated itself every day across the country.

By making nurses and other critical healthcare jobs impossible, we are actively shutting down a pathway to the middle class for so many nurses. It's a sad fact that some employers have policies that discipline and sometimes even terminate healthcare workers for trying to take our accrued sick leave so we can protect our patients. I myself contracted Covid while working on my unit. When I called off sick, I was told I didn't sound that sick. I was grossly positive for Covid and very symptomatic.

I was told if I did not come in, I would be suspended. If not from my union, I would have been suspended from my job. When we want to care for our patients, we want to care for them. We don't want to become vectors of disease that could possibly kill our patients. We are told we should take our sick leave when we need to. We would like to take our sick leave when we need to. And employers should be held accountable if they don't let us.

On behalf of all of us who truly care about our patients, I'm asking for your support for AB 1359. Today, I ask you to vote yes on AB 1359. Thank you so much. Thank you, chair Members. Matt Lajay, on behalf of SEIU California, proud sponsor of this Bill, I first would like to thank the Committee and their staff for their work on this Bill and appreciate all of their insight and expertise. Healthcare workers are really at a crisis.

This Bill will help ensure that they can take the time they need to rest and recuperate without fear of discipline or termination from their employer. Healthcare workers are 72% female, 68% people of color, and two thirds of them are the primary bedwinner of their family. And so it puts them in an incredible bind when they have to go to work and fear of losing that job. By the nature of their work, they are exposed to contagious diseases, mental exhaustion, long and physically demanding hours.

Healthcare workers jobs require critical thinking, and often their decisions are life or death. And for the patients that they serve and is incumbent and important for healthcare workers to be able to take that time when they're tired so they can deliver the high quality of care we expect.

However, some healthcare employers have created policies that discipline workers and in some cases led to termination when these workers act in their patient's self interest and take the time that they need to use their accrued sick leave, ensuring that workers can take a minimum number of days off. Protect not just the health of healthcare workers and their livelihood, but also the well being of the patients that we serve.

California law does not allow a disciplined or terminated employee to take legal action against their employer, and this Bill would give them that right to defend that right as well. We think that this is a modest approach so that healthcare workers can take the time they need and look forward to continuing to work with the opposition to try to address their concerns. For these reasons, we respectfully ask for. I vote. Thank you. Is anyone here in the room in support of AB 1359? Good afternoon.

Chair, Committee Members and staff, Christophe Mayer with the American Federation of State, county, and municipal employees in strong support. Thank you. Mitch Steiger with the California Labor Federation also in support. Thank you. Gloria Carter with Southern California Hospital. I'm in support. Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 1359? You can come up the front here if you like.

Thank you. Good afternoon, chair, Members of the Committee. Ronnie Bodigo here. On behalf of the California Hospital Association, respectfully, I'll just say we are, unfortunately, we're still in an opposed, unless amended position to AB 1359. I will like to say and thank the author, the Committee and the sponsors of the Bill for the most recent amendment comments. We do think they help clarify a couple of the other issues that we had with the Bill already.

So we do appreciate that and the direction that the conversation is moving. We continue to have some concerns, which is why we're holding our position specifically around paga liability. And we read the Bill as creating another private right of action. So we'll see potentially two private rights of action for even the same violations or mistakes that can be made. So we're concerned about that. And then it's unclear to us if this is in addition to time off. That's from a collective bargaining agreement as well.

So these are some of the questions and issues we like to continue having conversations around and look forward to continuing to have those productive conversations with the author and sponsor and staff. So thank you for your time.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here that would like to register opposition to AB 1359? All right, we'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments, motions? And I'll second and want to thank the author and opposition for the continued dialogue. I know that. And I appreciate the author for working with our Committee on some clarifications, definitions, things that I think will help the Bill moving forward.

And certainly feel free to continue to use our Committee staff as a resource as the Bill moves forward. As you're working on the language and making sure that the clarifications are appropriate. With that, would you like to close?

Yes. I think that Jacinta made a very good case for this Bill, and there's no better case to be made. Right? Someone who works with moms who are giving birth and little newborn babies, being pressured to come back to work while she has Covid, this shouldn't be happening. And we know the kind of toll that Covid took on our healthcare workers, on nurses, the burnout level that they're experiencing. We're hearing it from the hospitals, too. Right.

And so we need to do things that are protecting workers and making them feel safe at work and making sure that they are able to provide safe care to patients. Ultimately, this is not just about workers. It's about making sure that there's safe patient care happening and patients are protected as well, and our community is protected and healthy. And so we think this is an important step forward on that. So, with that, I respectfully ask for an Ivo. Thank you.

Yeah. And I appreciate that. And look, if you look internationally, our paid sick leave policy is an embarrassment, especially for wealthy countries. We already know we're way behind. At the very least, the least we can do is start looking at our frontline healthcare workers and what we can do better on their journey to doing better in General for all workers. So, thank you so much, Madam Secretary, please call the role on the vote for AB 1359.

Motion is do pass to appropriations. Kalra? Aye. Kalra, aye. Flora. Flora, not voting. Chen. Haney. Ortega. Ortega, aye. Rayes? Ward? Ward, aye.

That Bill will be placed on call. Thank you. Assembly Member Ortega, you have a motion and a secondary. Ortega, whenever you're ready.

All right. Good afternoon, chair and Members. Thank you for the opportunity to present AB 800. Today. AB 800 would enact a workplace readiness week in California high schools to inform students about their rights as workers and their rights as employed minors. Statistics show that in July of 2022, 55% of young people aged 16 to 24 were employed in the United States. That equates to 21 million people, the vast majority of whom work part time, Low wage, or entry level jobs.

In 2021, we're not talking about the 19 hundreds. We're talking about 2021, 109 teenagers died from work related injuries in the United States. The same year, over 33,000 teens suffered workplace injuries so severe that they needed to go to the emergency room. Workers' rights are essential knowledge for anyone participating in today's workforce.

It is essential for minors joining the workforce to be prepared with information on many of the laws that we pass here in this body, such as wage and hour protections, worker safety, paid sick leave, and prohibitions against employer harassment and the labor movement. AB 800 will ensure that young workers are informed of these workplace rights before they enter the workplace. Testifying in support today is Mr. Mitch Seiger, senior legislative advocate with the California Labor Federation and also a sponsor of the Bill.

We also have Mr. Thomas Carroll, a 10th grade social studies teacher at Selena's Union School district.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members. Mitch Stiger with the California Labor Federation, proud to co sponsor this Bill along with CFT and Jenup. For all the reasons stated so well by the author, we would just add a little bit about how the Bill is structured. There are basically three parts to it. The first is that it creates what's called a workplace readiness week that would coincide with Workers Memorial Day.

This is the week we are in right now, Workers Memorial Day is this Friday, and it would require all secondary schools to observe this week. So that's very open ended. It could be an Assembly, it could be a display in a hallway. It could be whatever works best for that school. And then for those students in the 11th and twelveth grades, the same topics are required to be integrated into the regular school program. So that doesn't have to happen during workplace readiness week.

We heard a lot of feedback from experts, educators in the area, that requiring things to happen during a certain week can be difficult for teachers to make work. So they can do that whenever they want during the year. We would also really emphasize that these topics are already covered in the most recent history social science framework. So we were very careful to not add new things to the framework because we also heard a lot of feedback about why you don't want to open up the curriculum.

So this is just creating greater specificity that teachers can use to comply with current law. And then the final significant piece is that it requires students to get a document from the school signed with their work permit that they get so that they can go work.

And the document would outline all of these rights that are covered and topics like minimum wage, the right to organize overtime, things like that, so that there's an extra piece of information that they can then take to help them know what their rights are on the job. We also think this is really important because a lot of these kids are translators for their parents, who may also be unfamiliar with the labor laws in California and their rights to organize and other rights like that.

So we think all of these together will really help kids bring their parents along with them into knowing more about their rights. And so all these reforms taken together, we think, will do a lot to give kids the knowledge that they need to stand up for themselves on the job. It'll also give them more knowledge of the agencies and departments that are there to protect them.

And then finally, especially the right to organize a union so that they can gain the power that they need to protect themselves and get the rights that they deserve on the job. We are your support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm Thomas Carroll. I'm an educator from the Salinas Valley. I've had the privilege of teaching for the last 11 years as a social science teacher in my own hometown, including time spent as a government and economics teacher. I often hear the refrain of college and career readiness. It's kind of the by word in education. Currently, there are mission statements, funding requests, WASP certification processes pretty much everywhere.

But often I found that we're falling short of truly preparing our students for college and far more often for those who are settled, strict and directly into the workforce. AB 800 is a step in the right direction to bridge the gap between our intentions and our practices. Students often learn best when they're learning not only what they are in the classroom, but in their environment around campus as well.

AB 800 will help to create a more positive campus culture through the real world application of what they're learning, and especially by valuing those individuals who are working, valuing those lived work experiences. Many of my students work in addition to being full time students. Salinas is an agricultural valley, and so they're often in agriculture, working in the fields, oftentimes to help their families make ends meet.

So a mix of awareness programs to build on the content standards that we already have has the potential to raise awareness of issues that are immediate and profound to the average student who's soon to graduate from high school. Keeping them aware of the rights will benefit them as well as their families for the rest of their lives. I know how important this content is and the impact that a renewed emphasis on their rights as current or future employees will have on them.

So as an educator, I request that you support AB 800.

Thank you. Is there anyone in the room here in support?

Christophe Mair with the American Federation of State, county, and Municipal Employees in support.

Thank you.

Trevor Griffey, University Council, American Federation of Teachers Support. Thank you John Chaband, California Nurses Association strong support. Thank you Sandra Burrow, SCIU California support. Thank you. John Runnan with the UCAFT in strong support. Thank you Tanya golden, with CFT support. Thank you Cassandra Curiel, CFT UESF support. Thank you Catherine Pasqual, CFT support.

Thank you, Chris Myers of the California School Employees Association and strong support.

Thank you MIA McIver, UCAFT Local 1474 support.

Thank you.

Rendon Kurzer, UCAFT strong support. Thank you Jeff Johnson, aft 1931. Strong support. Thank you. Erica Williams, CFT support. Thank you Jocelyn Foreman, CFT support. Thank you. Is there anyone here in opposition to AB 800?

Good afternoon. Robert Mutrie for the California Chamber of Commerce. We are opposed presently to AB 8001. First, I want to apologize to the sponsor, an author. Haven't been in touch with you guys in this Bill. As much as I would like to apologize for that, we have some just minor concerns. First, I'll be clear what we are not opposed to. We are not opposed to the informational piece for students seeking work permits. I actually think it's a very good piece, as we called out in our letter.

We're also not opposed to the portion of the Bill, which was not discussed here, but which helps introduce students to state approved apprenticeship programs. I think that's also a good piece. We're glad to see we have two minor concerns. One, we had a concern with the initial version that we're presently reviewing related to competition with existing student materials, which you've taken some amends to help address. We're glad to see that we're still looking at them.

So I haven't had a chance to assess the change, and then we had some confusion as to why the Bill calls out one specific drafter for that informational piece of the Bill. We believe that should be able something that a wider population, law firms and others should be able to participate in drafting. But otherwise, those are our minor concerns on it. And let me just briefly say that my 10th grade teacher inspired much of my career in social sciences. So thank you for that. Thank you.

Very kind. Opposition. Anyone else in opposition to AB 800 when we can't be AB 800? Any opposition? Okay, so no additional opposition. We'll come back to the Committee. We already have a motion. Yes, please. Senator Ward. Thank you.

Really excited for the opportunities under this Bill to be able to see that practice with kids coming up into high school age as well. But I was curious with maybe the opposition's minor points as well. This Bill is moving forward. Anything that's flexible and why. I'm just kind of curious. Did you think about the UC labor center as opposed to, like the labor Commissioner?

Yeah. So the UC Berkeley Labor center just received $13 million from the state. There you go.

So, you guys gave the money. And so given that we're in a deficit, it felt like a natural place to go where they've already have materials and the funding actually goes to help, like information, like the one that's in my Bill. And we've been in conversations with them to see if they could help us with this. And they actually already have stuff drafted, so we already gave them the money. Let's make sure we can put it to work, put it to use.

Very efficient. Thank you. Happy to move the Bill or. No, it's already moved.

Yeah, it's already on the table.

Assembly Member Haney, thank you and sorry for coming in late. Assembly Member Ortega, I want to commend you and thank you for your leadership on this Bill. I was so excited to see it when it came out, and I'm proud co author of the Bill, and we know that for many of the folks who are here who have organized to win critical fundamental labor rights.

It is so crucial that people understand those rights from an early age that they're able to assert them, that they will assert them for themselves and their families and their colleagues, and this will ensure that these laws actually have meaning in the real world and that people are protected. Their health and safety, their wellness, both for workers and consumers, students and everyone in between.

So this will have huge impacts for many, many decades to come by starting early with our young people and making sure they understand this history and their rights and are able to understand them and share them and educate others. So proud to co author of this Bill and thank you to all the folks. I saw some of the people from San Francisco who are here as well, and welcome and very proud to support this Bill.

Yeah, I really appreciate this Bill. Love to be added on as a co author as well. I believe I was the one that led the budget letter to get those resources to the labor center. So, absolutely, we need to partner with them and use their expertise to ensure that we're continuing our important role, especially educating the next generation of workers as to what their rights and responsibilities are. With that, would you like to close?

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Madam Secretary, if you can take the roll on the vote for AB 800.

Motion is do passed to appropriations. Kalra? Aye. Kalra, aye. Flora? Aye. Flora, aye. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Aye. Ortega, aye. Reyes? Ward? Aye.

That Bill is out. Thank you so much. If we can get a motion on item two, AB 521. Bauer-Kahan so moved. We have a motion. A second. If we can have roll on AB 521, please.

Motion is due, pass to appropriations. Kalra? Aye. Kalra, aye. Flora? Flora, aye. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes? Ward? Ward, aye.

That Bill is out. If we can have a motion on item three, AB 1076.

Motion in a second motion is due, pass to appropriations. Kalra? Aye. Kalra, aye. Flora? Flora, aye. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes? Ward? Ward, aye.

And we have the consent calendar on call. So if we can have the absent Members roll call on the absent Members.

Motion, see absent Members. Chen Haney. Haney aye. Rayes Ward Ward aye.

Okay, consent calendars out. And then up next, item four, AB 735. Assembly Member Berman. We have a motion in a second.

It's always good to start with a bipartisan motion and second. Thank you, y'all.

Good to see you.

Good to see you.

Appreciate you all giving me the opportunity to present this Bill in this meat locker. Of a hearing room I haven't presented here before. It is cold. AB 735 will create a high road utility careers program to be administered by the California Workforce Development Board. The utility sector, which includes water, wastewater, gas, electric and telecommunications, needs a consistent workforce base to maintain basic utility operations. This sector has been struggling to keep positions filled at various levels within their agencies.

In fact, maintaining a workforce is one of the top issues facing utilities in California. Under this program, individuals interested in careers in the utility sector will be connected to existing resources through a centralized information hub. The workforce Development Board will partner with statewide water, wastewater and energy utility associations to coordinate the program with existing and future programs. Moreover, the Department of Education will develop and distribute informational materials to high school students for career guidance on careers in utilities.

Going to skip ahead a little bit because of the bipartisan motion and second, respectfully ask for I vote thank you.

Good afternoon, chair and Members. My name is Andrea Abergel. I'm with the California Municipal Utilities Association. CMUA is a proud sponsor of AB 735 and applauds Assemblymember Berman's leadership on this issue. CMUA represents publicly owned electric utilities that deliver electricity to over 25% of the state and public water and wastewater agencies that deliver water to over 75% of the state.

Our public agency Members are responsible not only for delivering electricity and water, but also for managing and preserving the state's resources and advancing the state's climate goals. A large factor in any utility success in those areas is a reliable workforce. These utilities are experiencing a silver tsunami of retirements and other departures in critical roles. The City of Sacramento Department of Utilities, for example, has been experiencing an average of 15% vacancies for the past several years.

As another example, in the last year, Rancho California Water district had around 24% vacant positions, which took about an average of three months to fill. AB 735 will provide a dedicated, comprehensive solution to address workforce challenges for the utility sector. And seeing that there's General consensus, I will also be briefed. So thank you very much. Urge your I vote.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here in support of AB 735? Mike Robeson on behalf of the Rancho California Water District and the Los Angeles County sanitation districts, thank you Rod Brewer for Southern California Edison, here in support of AB 735. Thank you.

Matt Clobinson. Here on behalf of SMUD in support.

Thank you Sarah Boudreaux, on behalf of the City of Roseville, in support.

Thank you Tyler Gerlack, on behalf of the calasian chamber, in support.

Thank you Brian Sanders, City of Sacramento in support.

Thank you.

Julia hall with the Association of California Water Agencies in support. Thank you, Annalie Aiken, on behalf of Mesa Water District in support.

Thank you. Is everyone here in opposition to AB 735? Seeing no one. We'll bring it back to the Committee. No comments while we do have a motion. Thank you so much, Senator Berman, for pushing on the high road job opportunities, which is something that scenario has worked a lot on over the years. And we appreciate your partnership and leadership on this. Madam Secretary, if we can call the roll on the vote for AB 735, please.

Motion is do passed to appropriations. Kalra? Aye. Kalra, aye. Flora? Aye. Flora, aye. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes? Ward? Ward, aye.

That Bill is out. Thank you. If we could get a motion on item 10, AB 58. A motion, a second. You have the roll call on the vote for AB 58.

Motion is do pass to appropriations. Kalra? Aye. Kalra, aye. Flora? Flora, not voting. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes, Ward? Ward, aye.

Thank you. And we have two items on call I just want to get out, which is item five, AB 1224. Brian, if I can get the roll on the absent Members for that.

Current motion is do pass to appropriations. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes, Ward? Ward, aye..

That Bill is out. And item six, AB 1359, Skiavo current.

Motion do pass to appropriations. Chen Haney? Haney Aye Rayes.

And that Bill is out and we'll keep the roll open. And there's two more bills, and I'll be presenting for Senator Santiago as well as for my own Bill.

All right, Mr. Chair, ready when you are.

I'll start with item one, which is AB 520 Santiago. All right, thank you, Mr. Chair. And Assembly of Santiago gratefully is accepting. Actually, there's no amendments, but, yeah, he was thanking me. That's so nice of him, thanking me and the Committee of Staff for the hard work. This Bill is simply about protecting our property service workers. The property service industry includes some of the lowest paid workers. Currently, these workers are vulnerable to wage theft, sexual harassment and workplace injuries.

When public entities contract out property services, they eliminate any responsibility to protect workers or ensure safe working conditions. AB 520 would deter public entities from contracting property service companies who commit wage theft by holding public entities jointly liable for wage theft violations and providing access to conduct workplace health, safety and workers' rights training for property service workers who clean public spaces property service workers who clean and protect our public space should receive the same protections as those who work in private spaces.

With us to provide testimony is Sandra Barrero, SCIU government relations advocate and Joy Hunt, estate Security officer.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members, and thank you, assemblymember cholera the property service industry fuels unfair competition by awarding contracts to businesses with the lowest labor costs. So when you're a business that's already paying minimum wage, the only way to stay competitive is through wage theft and eliminating any health and safety training. To help address the exploitative nature of this industry, the Legislature passed SB 588 in 2015 to hold companies jointly liable when their contractors commit wage theft.

However, public entities are not included in existing law, and as a result, the public sector continues to contract with companies who continue to violate the law. AB 520 would add public entities to existing law, hold them to the same standards as private companies, and prevent public funds from perpetuating a cycle of worker abuse. This Bill also provides a way for property service workers to receive health and safety training even when their employer avoids their obligation. I respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Next witness, please.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. My name is Joy Hunt. I'm a security officer and a Member of SCIU USW, and I've worked at state buildings for five years. I have four children, four grandchildren, two great grands that will be born later this year, plus a bonus grand, and I live here in Sacramento.

I've been a security officer for the office of the Legislative Council Building right there on 11th and J, helping legislative employees feel safe and supported, and if requested, I escort them to their cars. Overall, my role as a security officer is to enforce rules, maintain order, and to serve as a helpful and approachable presence for everyone entering the building. Even though I serve public employees, I do not receive the same benefits.

I'm ineligible for CalPERS, and because of a loophole in the law, I'm paid below the standard for public employees in 2020. I requested 40 hours of vacation pay, which I was entitled to under my union contract. A month later, a branch manager informed me that the company no longer pays provides paid time off. Okay. This is just one example of how my employer attempts to reduce labor costs by committing wage theft. Okay.

Some of my coworkers work through breaks, lunch work off the clock or don't receive overtime. AB 520 is a critical Bill that demands attention from the Legislature. It's time for the state to stop doing business with companies that exploit workers by engaging in wage theft to cut their labor costs. As a worker who earns $18 per hour, every penny counts, especially with my responsibilities to my children, grandchildren, and great grandson.

Thank you so much.

Respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Anyone else in support? Name and organization, please.

Mr. Chair, members Sarah Flocks, California Labor Federation, in support.

Thank you so much. Anyone in opposition to AB 520? Seeing none. Bring it back to the Committee. Any questions from the Committee? Seeing none. Do we have a motion? A second. Thank you. Mr. Chair, would you like to close?

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Madam Secretary, please call the roll.

Motion is due. Pass to appropriations. Kalra Aye. Cholera. Aye. Flora. Aye. Flora, aye. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes. Ward? Ward. Aye.

A Bill is out.

Thank you.

I think the chair has one more Bill. AB 1516. Ready when you are.

Thank you. Proud to present AB 1516, which would require the labor and Workforce Development Agency to convene a working group of state representatives, organizations representing low wage or immigrant workers, and organizations advocating for the rights of incarcerated persons to study and report back to the Legislature on raising the minimum wage and ending the sub minimum wage for incarcerated workers. This working group is critical to any future efforts to raise the state minimum wage.

The group's final report to the Legislature can guide lawmakers in enacting a minimum wage that truly reflects what working families need to make ends meet. We know that workers of color are disproportionately paid the minimum wage. So are foreign born workers. These workers deserve a living wage, a wage that can actually lift them out of working poverty. Even worse, incarcerated workers who do the same work as other workers, including fighting some of our worst wildfires, are paid far less than the minimum wage.

This archaic practice, with its legacy from slavery and post reconstruction must stop. AB 1516 will lay the foundation for critical minimum wage reform. I respectfully ask for your aye vote. And with me today to provide supporting testimony is Saru Jayaraman, President of One Fair Wage and Director of the Food Labor Research center at the University of California, Berkeley, and Sean Robinson, life coach with the Anti-Recidivism Coalition.

Thank you so much. We'll have two witnesses, two minutes apiece. Thank you.

Thank you. We are an extraordinarily historic moment in which millions of low wage workers have walked off the job across the State of California and nationally, refusing to work for poverty wages. Unable to work for poverty wages in a moment of incredibly high rising costs and inflation. There has been a very large coalition that's come together, a historic coalition that's come together around the need for a living wage for all in California.

It includes one fair wage, which is 300,000 restaurant and service workers, the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, the California Working Families Party, legal service of prisoners with children, all of us for none, calling for a minimum wage that is closer to the actual cost of living in California and ending that last summer wage for incarcerated workers. As many of you know, there is an effort, there has been an effort to collect enough signatures to get $18 on the ballot next November.

But the sponsors of that ballot measure have joined our coalition, saying it is too little, too late. Because when you look at the MIT living wage calculator right now, one person in a two parent, two child household needs $23.75 to cover the basic cost of food, transportation, housing, rent. 15.50 is far too little and $18 is too little, too late.

Our Bill is looking at a minimum wage that would be closer to $22 to $24 an hour, which would raise wages for 32.9% of households in California, nearly a third of households who are majority women, led. All over the country, we are seeing minimum wage bills currently moving to get minimum wages closer to the cost of living. Hawaii already passed 18. New York just passed 17. California is actually trailing on this issue.

And all across the country, we are seeing an effort to not only raise the minimum wage closer to living wages, but to end sub minimum wages here in California with the opportunity to end this very historic legacy of slavery, the sub minimum wage for incarcerated workers, which is created with the exception to the 13th amendment that allowed for slavery in the case of incarceration. Last year, you, the Legislature, voted unanimously to raise wages for incarcerated workers. You have a chance to lead on this now.

This is a study Bill. It will begin the process of actually getting a living wage for all. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Next witness, please.

Good afternoon. My name is Sean Robinson, and I am a life coach at ARC Anti recidivism coalition, located here in Sacramento, California. I have done 22 years of my life behind the walls, and in doing so, I was assigned to jobs that paid cents on the dollar. I was paid eight cents an hour, which equaled to $12 a month. Working full time, 40 hours a week and 160 hours a month. I got $12. Let me repeat myself, 40 hours a week and 160 hours a month.

I got $12. $12 a month only afforded me three items that I needed in order to maintain proper skincare. Imagine working every week for 22 years straight and still being able to. Still being able to. Still being unable to pay for the basic necessities. I came from a poor family and couldn't rely on anyone to help me financially.

Inside, I was unable to learn what Independence was all about and could not have learned that on $12 a month upon release, I had no savings and was faced with the hardship of having to pay restitution. If I were making a livable wage, I would have been able to pay my restitution after working 22 years straight and also support my livelihood. I would have been set up for success after being released.

I was locked up at a very young age and did not get the opportunity to pay bills, learn how to manage money, or have the basic survivor skills. Coming home from prison is already hard by itself. I have a felony record, no family support, and was sent to a city that was unfamiliar to me. Not having any money to support my transition just added insult to injury after I had already served my time as an adult.

A person that has paid their debt to society should have the right to experience independent because it does affect the livelihood of freedom.

We could slowly have you wrap up your thought, please. Thank you.

What did you say?

You slowly wrap up your thought.

Oh, my bad, my bad.

You're good.

It's all good.

Okay.

The right to livelihood shouldn't be a privilege, and being self sufficient falls into that category. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Anyone else in support of AB 1516?

Evelyn Mata, One Fair Wage in support. Audrey Lim, One Fair Wage in support. Barbara Chavez, legal services for prisoners with children in support.

Hello, Chairman Members. Hedoni Mogulad here, policy analyst with legal services for prisoners with children. And all of us are none. Proud co sponsors in support. Thank you.

Josh Pinewood, anti recipient coalition proud sponsor and strong support.

Aliyah Mohammed, legal services for prisoners with children and co-sponsor and proud to support.

Good morning. Gordon Limbrick, I'm with planting justice and all of us are none in support.

My name is Saul Mercado and I'm from planting justice in Oakland and I'm in strong support.

Thank you.

My name is Lawrence Cox and I'm. With legal services for prisoners with children. All of us are strong support.

My name is Ralph Prada with one fair wage and I support.

Good afternoon. My name is Tanisha Cannon with legal services for prisoners with children. A Member of All of us Are None, proud co-sponsor and in support of AB 1516.

Thank you.

My name is Mercedes Lott. I'm with All of Us Are None and I support. Jesse Clyde Burleson, in custody program coordinator, legal services for prisoners with children and All Of us Are None in strong support.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Alyssa Moore, legal services for prisoners with children in strong support.

Thank you.

Espan Nunez, on behalf of the Anti Recidivism Coalition, sister warrior Freedom Coalition, social change and Insight Garden program, in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Jamie Carper. I'm a Member of anti recidivism coalition. I'm in strong support.

Thank you.

Tanya Golden, a concerned citizen support. Thank you. Henry Ortiz with legal services for prisoners with children and all of us who know in Sacramento chapter in strong support of my sister. You did a great job today. Big shout out.

Thank you so much. Anyone else in support of AB 1516? Seeing none. Anyone in opposition to AB 1516?

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair Members. Ashley Hoffman with the California Chamber of Commerce. We just have an opposed, unless amended position. Do not oppose absolutely creating the working group on this issue. But we did notice the language does not include a representative from the employer community. We do think that is important when we're talking about working group to make recommendations to increase the minimum wage, especially when we're talking about the small business perspective.

Thus of chronicle recently did have an article saying that a lot of small businesses are still in survival mode, interviewing several small business owners who ultimately did end up having to close their businesses. So I think it's very important to have the employer perspective, especially to consider any economic ramifications or any unintended consequences that could come from an increase. So appreciate your consideration. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else in opposition to AB 1516, Mr.

Chair Members Chris McKayley, on behalf of Cal Sherman. Sherman, we support the requested amendment from Cal Chamber. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Nick Chappie here on behalf of the California Trucking Association, aligned with Cal Chamber in opposition. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi, Ryan. Elaine, on behalf of the California Retailers Association, also in opposition, aligned with the chamber. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Anyone else? Opposition, maybe 1516, seeing none. Questions from the Committee. Mayor, Mr. Ward, thank you.

I really appreciate this proposal. Certainly have been very supportive of the efforts that we've done today and we need to do so much more as well. And I'm wondering for the working group, I see that you have generally kind of four buckets between the layer Commissioner's office, the Employment Development Department and other areas. Were you thinking about a particular size of the board that that might encompass for total membership?

I think that's part of the conversation is to figure out the size, composition and what have you.

Yeah. And I think it probably would land somewhere between seven or 11 Members. And I'm wondering to the opposition's point, if that's just a reasonable accommodation. Is this something that you would look at considering as well?

I'm absolutely willing to go back to sponsors and have conversations about the makeup of the board. I mean, one thing I do want to make clear, this is not a macro analysis of kind of the economic impact of increasing the wage. It's really looking at what we're talking about, what a living wage would be in California, the impacts on impoverished families and working families, as well as the legacy of sub minimum wage.

So it's not, I get that in looking at the staff analysis, talking about employers'ability to afford to hire and do business in California. That's not really the focus of this. However, that being said, more than willing to go back to the sponsors and have a conversation about the composition that could potentially include employer voices as well.

And I think just as we've considered legislation before, I know we'll be talking hopefully about Senator Deraz's Bill as well coming up. But everybody is here at this conversation table to be able to have that dialogue and have that input. And I think it's also important for other sides as well to hear the testimony of Californians. And I think that that might sort of reach back into conversations that they may not have on a regular basis. I think it can be helpful both ways.

So I really appreciate your consideration as this is moving forward. Happy to support it today.

Can I just, sorry. Add we represent my organization. We represent 300,000 restaurant and service workers and 2500 small business restaurant owners who have come out in very strong support of raising a minimum wage because they cannot find enough staff willing to work for poverty wages and because consumption rates, they know are very low, not enough to support small businesses when inflation costs prevent Low wage workers from consuming.

Thank you so much, Mr. Haney.

Thank you to the author. I'd love to be added as a co author and want to thank you all for your work, the witnesses, and everyone who's here in the room. It is absolutely true that our minimum wage that we have in place now is grossly inadequate. We know that. We know that $18, as you said, would be too little, too late.

And so this really gives us the opportunity to analyze where we need to be, the true impact, in all of the different ways, including on small businesses, of having such a Low minimum wage. And I really want to appreciate you for including the sub minimum wage that incarcerated people experience that is so critical, especially as we hopefully are moving towards taking slavery out of our constitution this coming year. The timing for this could not be better.

And I think what I would say, and I'm sure this is a part of it, this gives us an opportunity, in a very unique way, to look at the broader impact of this sub minimum wage. Cents on a dollar, on families, on children, on communities throughout our state, on victims, survivors. I mean, there's a whole set of additional consequences that this wage has by paying people so little for their labor.

And so this Commission will provide us that opportunity and also to address the broader issues of supporting our small businesses as well. And thank you for your leadership, and thank you for the witnesses and everyone who's here.

Thank you so much. Any other comments? Nope. Mr. Chair, would you like to close?

Respectfully, ask for an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Madam. Second, please call the roll. We need a motion. A second. Thank you.

Motion is do passed to appropriations. Kalra? Kalra, aye. Flora? Flora, not voting. Chen? Haney? Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes? Ward. Ward. Aye.

Motions. I will leave it open for absent Members.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. And we have one remaining item from Assembly Member Haney, ACA 6. Motion a second.

Thank you.

Before he even sat down.

Thank you and good afternoon. Hey, good afternoon, chair and fellow Committee Members. I'm here to present to you ACA 6, a constitutional amendment that would address the basic labor standards for workers at the University of California. I am a son of the UC. I grew up in student family housing. My mom graduated from UC. My sister, my sister and my dad work at UC, and I am a graduate of UC.

I am very proud of the University of California and a huge supporter of the University, as we all are. And that's why we are here, to ensure that the same basic labor standards that apply to every other employer in California also apply to the great University of California. The problem right now is that neither the Governor nor the Legislature have the Executive or legislative authority to ensure basic labor standards apply to or are enforced at UC.

Due to a 150 year old outdated provision of the state constitution, ACA six would allow voters to amend Article nine, section nine of the state constitution. An affirmative vote by the public would cover hundreds of thousands of Californians performing work at the University of California with basic labor standards adopted by the Legislature.

Californians who are currently not covered by basic labor standards include underpaid service and maintenance workers who clean toilets, Bedpans, pick up trash, cook food, perform clerical functions, maintain buildings, and perform jobs subject to outsourcing with unequal wages and inadequate benefits.

This constitutional amendment would allow these UC workers to have the right to and be covered by the following basic state labor standards as they apply, similar to the private sector equal pay standards, including those established pursuant to the California Equal Pay act, the payment of a minimum wage, the timely payment of wages, the payment of overtime and standards governing the hours of work, occupational safety and health standards, meal and rest breaks paid leave, including paid sick leave.

Despite the Supreme Court holding that state legislation may be applicable to the University when the legislation regulates matters of statewide concern and despite the fact that the Legislature has adopted such laws, the University of California has repeatedly prevailed in excluding hundreds of thousands of Californians who perform work for the University of California from basic state labor standards that apply to all other California employers.

With me here today to testify in support and for any questions is Catherine Liebarger, President of AFSME 3299 and Sarah Flocks, legislative and strategic campaigns Director for the California Labor Federation.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee. Catherine Liebarger, President of APSME 3299 in support. APSME 3299 represents service workers, janitors, groundskeepers, cafeteria workers and medical assistants at the University of California. Article nine, section nine of the state constitution was adopted nearly 150 years ago before basic labor standards were in place. No equal pay for women, minimum wage, overtime pay, meal and rest breaks, sick leave, prevailing wages or restrictions on outsourcing of jobs.

This outdated provision of the state constitution has allowed UC to repeatedly prevail in court and exclude those working for them from basic state labor standards. No other workers in California are forced to negotiate for these basic labor standards. The Legislature and California voters modernized the state's constitution to ensure every woman's right to choose. ACA six will do the same for equal pay. We request your consideration of ACA six to allow California voters to change this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair Member. Sarah Flocks, California Labor Federation and as a former UC employee, I've actually benefited from the very hard work of, ask me3299 Members and seen the incredible work that they do every day along with the other UC employees. And we are here in strong support. And as a co sponsor of this measure, we've seen over 500 changes to the state constitution since 1879, everything from school funding to rainwater capture to a woman's right to choose.

And over the same time period, legislators in the labor movement have passed basic labor standards. Everyone in this room has been part of that. And yet at the same time, hundreds of thousands of workers at UC, including 3299 Members and many more, are excluded from those basic protections, all because of an outdated provision in the state's constitution. So we think this is a very basic, very important change, and we urge your support. Thank you.

Thank you. Is anyone here in support of AB or ACA 6?

Marico Yoshihar, on behalf of the California Employment Lawyers Association in strong support.

Thank you.

Mia McIver. I teach at UCLA. I'm a proud Member of UCAFT Local 1474. Proudly in support.

Thank you Trevor Griffey, University Council, American Federation of Teachers, strong support.

Thank you Sandra Brewer, on behalf of SEIU, California in support.

Thank you Matt Broadford, the Teamsters unite here, machinists, engineers and scientists of California and utility workers in support. Thank you.

Thank you Susanna Atwood, AFT 2121 and CFT in support. Thank you Tanya golden here for CFT in support. Thank you.

Catherine Pasquale, CFT support. Thank you.

Tiffany Moff, on behalf of CFT in support.

Thank you Christophe Mair, American Federation of State, County Municipal Employees in support.

Thank you. Is anyone here in opposition to ACA six?

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Members. Jason Murphy, on behalf of the University of California, rising today in opposition to this Bill, I first want to start by saying that the University of California is committed to ensuring that all of our employees are treated fairly and have the support they need to succeed in their positions.

However, and that's reflected, I believe, in the successful contracts we've been able to settle and negotiate with our variety of unions, most recently with UAW these last few months, and CNA in past months before that, and many others as well. Looking forward to beginning negotiations with Askme later this year for the next contract, successor contract. But frankly, the University is struggling to understand the premise behind the need for this Bill. As we look down the list of perceived rights that are not available.

I would just note that as I look down the list, we are covering our employees with these basic rights either by virtue of University policy, which has been in place in many cases for decades, or by virtue of our adherence to federal law, the Fair Labor Standards Act, FSLA, including, for example, the protections for equal treatment of women, which is included under federal law, and so forth.

So, again, we disagree with the premise that the University of California is somehow not covered by these types of items. With respect to minimum wage, I would point out that the University of California, by the way, is abiding by the state's new minimum wage of $15.50 that took place or took effect earlier this year in January. We applaud and appreciate the State of California has reached the $15 an hour threshold for state minimum wage.

The University of California was at $15 an hour back in October of 2017. We did that voluntarily as a result of then President Napolitano's decision under the Fair Wage Fair Work act to increase the minimum wage. And President Drake, our current UC President, has been willing to support that going forward as well. Respect to prevailing wage it's understanding from our review of our terms and agreements that we are paying prevailing wage. So we don't think there's much change there.

Occupational health and safety when it comes to heat and cooling temperatures in our buildings, fume hood vent speeds, and so forth, all the things that fall under the OSHA rules. Clearly, as was noted previously, the matters of General statewide concern. We abide by the Cal OSHA health and safety rules. Timely pay. We had some unfortunate circumstances a few years ago when we converted over to our new payment process under UC path, where some of our UAW employees were not being paid adequately and timely.

Ms. Leva passed a Bill, SB 698, that required timely pay. We're abiding by that law with respect to meal and rest breaks, Mr. Bradford and the Senate had a Bill last year, SB 1334, that was chapters into law, clearly identified the University of California as being impacted by that Bill. We did not oppose that Bill. We're implementing that Bill now.

So as we go down the list of the items that we feel that would be covered under this proposed ACA, we feel we're meeting or exceeding all those limits. So in closing, I would just say we believe ACA Six would treat the University of California like no other public entity, not like the CSU, not like the California State University within the higher education community.

And lastly, would just note that the autonomy that's been afforded to the University over its decades of existence has been foundational to our successful ability to serve students, serve patients, and perform our public service mission. We believe that's fundamentally still important. And again, would just in closing, respectfully ask for a no vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here in opposition to ACA Six? All right, we'll bring it back to the Committee. Any questions or comments? Assembly Member Ortega?

First of all, I want to thank the author for taking on such an important issue. I also was a former representative of these workers, many who are women of color who work day in and day out, night and day, to make sure that we do have a premier institution, not just in California, but in the world, and are often not recognized and not seen.

This Bill is about giving the opportunity for UC to basically give UC employers, employees the same basic labor standards that the rest of the state has. Is that what this Bill does?

Yes.

I am full support of this Bill.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments? Well, thank you, Senator Rahim, for being this Ford. I'm proud to be a co author and a UC Santa Barbara graduate, and so I'm hopeful that this can go shows us right, hopeful that this can proceed forward and we can get this before the voters. Would you like to close?

Yes, and I do want to thank the representative from the University of California for committing to follow all of these basic labor laws and having committed to do so in the past. And presently, what we want to do is just clarify exactly what he said, which is that all of these laws do apply to the UC, that they're required to follow them just like every other employer. It doesn't treat the UC differently.

It treats them the same, just like a public sector employer or private sector employer. This would allow the Legislature to appropriately apply basic labor standards to every employer. I will say a reason why this is necessary to clarify this is because the UC has gone into court repeatedly and in some cases, one asserting that they don't have to follow the California minimum wage law, that they don't have to follow the California equal pay law or the prevailing wage law.

So this would clarify exactly what the representatives say, which is that they do have to follow it just like everyone else. Protect the workers and protect the well being of this critical, essential institution. With that, respectfully ask for your. I vote.

Thank you very much, Madam Secretary. If we can call the roll on.

ACA six motion is be adopted to the Appropriations Committee.

Kalra, aye. Kalra, aye. Flora? Chen? Chen, aye. Haney? Aye. Haney, aye. Ortega? Ortega, aye. Reyes? Rayes, aye. Ward? Ward.

Yeah, I think we just had opposition. We didn't have folks that wanted to express support, for the record, didn't we? We did. Right, yeah. And I'll just. Right, okay. It's been a great afternoon. Okay. Yeah. All right, so that Bill is out and so I'm going to go through. I think my notes show that it's just a Senator Chen and Reyes need to add on and everyone else, I think, is caught up, so we'll go ahead.

Every Bill is out, so we'll start with the consent calendar.

Consent calendar. Chen? Chen, aye. Reyes? Reyes, aye.

Okay, on to item AB 520. Item one.

Chen? Chen, aye. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

AB 521 Bauer-Kahan.

Chen? Chen, aye. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

Item AB 1076 Bauer-Kahan.

Chen? Chen, aye. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

AB 735 Berman.

Chen? Chen, aye. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

AB 1224 Brian

Chen? Chen, aye. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

AB 1359 Schiavo

Chen? Chen, No. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

Item 800

Chen? Chen, No. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

AB 58.

Chen? Chen, not voting. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

AB 50 and 60.

Chen? Chen, not voting. Reyes. Reyes, aye.

We are adjourned. Thank you, everyone.