Senate Standing Committee on Labor, Public Employment and Retirement

Senate Labor and Public Employment and Retirement Committee will commence. We are let's see where we are. We are starting as a subcommittee this morning. Many of our members are in four different committees. So we're gonna do the best that we can here today.

We have 18 items, file items on our agenda and we are ready to start with mister Lee. File item number one AB 1729. Any witnesses in support of this bill, please have a seat at the front table. You each have two minutes. When we are ready for your testimony, you may begin.

Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I am here to present AV seventeen twenty nine to update the telework policy for state agencies. This policy has not been amended or updated in over thirty years. It does not reflect the technological opportunities or workplace realities of 2026. According to the state audit report last year, if state if state workers telework three or more days weekly, the state could reduce office space for roughly 30% and save upwards of $225,000,000 annually.

Telework and hybrid schedules are the norm in many state departments, and return to the office requires planning. And according to the Sacramento Bee's reporting, more than 70 state offices could not accommodate state workers ahead of Newsom's RTO order for July 2025. The RTO order did not acknowledge the realities about office space, office leases, office equipment, or parking.

The RTO order did not acknowledge employees that had been hired as remote workers and may not be able to reallocate, and that is still true of of 2026. Telework led to accumulative savings of nearly 393,000 metric tons of Co2 emissions across a 121 state departments between twenty one twenty twenty one and 2023.

And how do we know this? Because the state auditors report found that over two thirds of state departments work reported that productivity was improved or unchanged when employees were teleworking three or more days per week. And approximately three fourths of local governments offer hybrid schedules. And even looking at Indeed website today, the following companies, many of them my constituents work for, still offer remote jobs, like Amazon, Aetna, Cisco, Salesforce, Humana, UnitedHealth Group, Wells Fargo.

Remote and hybrid workplaces are becoming standard for the wide range of jobs.

So this bill updates state telework policy to require state departments to have written, thought out telework policy. And when a department wants implement or return to the office plan, departments simply need to identify the operational needs to spend the amount of time and money to do so to properly prepare. And from 2020 to 2024, the state proudly displayed a dashboard of the savings and benefits of telework. This bill will bring that dashboard back so the public can see whether telework is working for the state.

Now, I will say is that I agree with Governor Newsom when he first created this innovative policy during the era of the pandemic, and we have hired thousands and thousands of workers across the state in this innovative system.

I also agree with Governor Newsom when he said that state workers are the backbone of the state infrastructure. When we are fighting against so many threats happening to our state and for our working class families, we need our state workers to have a real work life balance, to have high morale, and have a true decent affordable quality of living. And all we can do that And we can do all that by just continuing the status quo.

So I agree that he said they are the backbone of a state legislate a state government, and we ought to back up our state workers so that we can enable all the ambitious things we wanna do for our state employees for our state residents. With me here today in support is Telene Ghazarian, the president of CASE, and Karina Grove representing CAPS UAW.

Thank you. You each have two minutes.

Hello? Madam Chair, good morning. My name is Telene Ghazarian, and I am the President of CASE, which is the California attorneys, administrative law judges, and hearing officers in state employment. We represent about 5,200 state employees. I am here today in support of AB 1729, which our union is proud to cosponsor.

AB 1729 is a reasonable bill. It does not require full time remote work. It simply requires that telework decisions be based on evidence, transparency, and the actual needs of the work that's being performed. A one size fits all mandate does not make sense where state employees perform vastly different work with vastly different operational needs.

So in my own position as an attorney with the Department of Healthcare Services, I collaborate regularly with agency leadership and the governor's office on complex and sensitive issues, including responding day and night to the relentless federal attacks to medical and reproductive freedom.

For six years, we have demonstrated that we can collaborate across programs, departments, and geographic regions effectively using modern technology while still coming together in person when it serves a meaningful operational need. Telework made state government more efficient. It reduced commuting and travel by allowing statewide meetings, hearings, and trainings to move online. At the same time, housing and living costs were soaring, and telework helped make continued public service financially feasible.

It also helped the state keep experienced employees and attract talented professionals from across California despite the growing pay gap between, with the private sector.

And for those reasons, I respectfully ask for your Aye vote. Thank you.

Hello? I think I did. There we go. Good morning, Madam Chair and committee Members. My name is Karina Grove. I am a state worker at the State Water Resources Control Board.

I am also a proud member and the financial secretary for CAP CUAW local 1115, the union of approximately 6,000 state of California employed scientists in over 50 departments. Our union enthusiastically cosponsors AB 1729. The state auditor determined that reducing office space through expanded telework could save approximately 225,000,000

annually, primarily through decreased leasing, operations, and maintenance expenses. These savings are achievable when employees can telework three or more days per week without compromising productivity or service delivery. A blanket return to office mandate imposes unnecessary financial strain on state employees during a time of elevated fuel, vehicle, childcare, and housing costs. Over the last six years, telework has repeatedly demonstrated its effectiveness in supporting productivity, collaboration, and inclusivity while reducing emissions, traffic congestion, and risks associated with commuter travel.

In my position at the water board, I help ensure protection of wetlands by regulating discharges to waters of the state.

I have written sequence documents for permits that protect wetlands, and I'm currently working on an online application system that aims to reduce staff time and processing these permits. While some scientists require in person work like lab work, my work and that of many of my colleagues is in regulation where we analyze data, write reports, issue permits, and consult with stakeholders across the state, work we've been doing successfully for the last six years on a telework basis.

This legislation offers a fiscal responsible, environmentally sound, and an equitable approach that benefits California's workforce and taxpayers alike. For these reasons, I urge you to vote Aye on this measure. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you very much. Are there any me too's in support of this bill? Please state your name and affiliation.

Madam Chair, good morning. Ted Toppin for the Professional Engineers in California Government and the Association of California State Supervisors, proud sponsors of the bill, urge your support. Thank you.

Hello. Good morning. Annika Walls, president, proud President of SEIU Local 1,000 representing a 100,000 state employees in strong support of AB 1729 and urgent an Aye vote. Thank you.

Madam Chair and Members or Madam Chair, Matt Broad here for CASE in support. Thank you.

Hello. Stephen Boyd. I'm an automation analyst for the Employment Development Department encouraging your support on the bill. Thank you.

Hi. Stephen Gonzales. I'm an analyst with High Speed Rail, and I strongly support support urge your support on this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Leif Jones. I work for the Department of Housing and Community Development. I am here in support of AB 1729, and I respectfully urge a yes vote. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is David J. Egan. I'm with the Department of Housing and Community Development, a proud member of SEIU Local one thousand. I urge your support for AB 1729. Thank you.

Hi. I'm Kim Tengarjaya. I'm a member of CAPS UAW, and I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hello. I'm Trinity Smith. I'm with the Department of Public Health. I work with the Department of Public Health. I'm a Member of SEIU Local one thousand, and I support AB 1729 and respectfully urge a yes vote.

Hello. My name is Radey Yacine. I am an attorney with the agricultural labor relations board and a member of the case union, and I urgely and I very, very enthusiastically urge your support. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Baltisa with the Agriculture and Labor support. I urge your support.

Hi. My name Hannah Hendrickson I'm an office technician with the California Department of Aging and I support this bill.

My name is Oliver Hendrickson, and I support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Skyler Waldeg Myers. I work as an analyst for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. I'm here in support of, AB 1729, and I urge your support for it as well. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Melissa Hoagie, and I'm an analyst at Housing and Community Development and also a constituent. I am a proud member of SEIU Local 1,000, and I am here in support of AB 1729, and I respectfully request an Aye vote. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Selena Benitez. I'm a budget analyst with the California Department of Aging. I'm here to support AB 1729, and I strongly urge an Aye vote. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Elie Macaluso Moore. I work for the Employment Development Department, and I support AB 1729, and I graciously ask you for an Aye vote.

Good morning. My name is Claudia Perez, and I'm an outreach analyst for the Employment Development Department, and I strongly urge your support for this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is April Hughes. I'm an office technician and a steward for the state for department under the State Treasurer's Office. I highly support or highly suggest an Aye vote for this.

Good morning. My name is Katie Fox. I'm an analyst too for the Air Resources Board, and I encourage you to support this bill.

My name is Robert Bradshaw. I'm a Senior Data Analyst with Department of Justice, and I urge your support on AB1729. Thank you.

Yes. Don Antonowich, Department of Pesticide Regulation, where we spent seven years and millions of dollars to go paperless, and we're there. I can do my work evaluating pesticides from the space station if necessary, and I urge your vote yes on 1729.

Asia Murphy, Quantitative Ecologist with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and I urge you guys to vote yes on this.

Good morning. Robert Rossi. I'm a Senior Environmental Scientist with the Department of Toxic Substances Control, a CAPS UAW member, and I traveled 200 miles today to urge you to vote aye on this bill. Thank you.

Hi. I'm Rafika Larosa with CAPS UAW. I'm a Senior Scientist with Department of Fish and Wildlife, and I'm here in support of AB 1729. Thanks.

Hi. I'm Karen Adkins. I'm with CAPS UAW, and I am a Senior Scientist at CDFW. And I urge you to support yes?

Good morning. My name is Vanessa Lowe. I'm with CAPS UAW, and and I'm a Senior Environmental Scientist with CFW, and I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Laurie Steffey. I'm an Environmental Scientist at the Department of Toxic Substances Control, also a CAPS member and a constituent of Alex Lee. Thank you for this bill. Thank you.

My name is Julia Rose Pacheco. I work as a tax technician for the Franchise Tax Board. I'm here in support of this bill, and I kindly implore you all to support this bill as well.

Hello. My name is Olga Ledergerber, and I work as an analyst at Employment Development Department. And I urge you to support this bill because commuting thirty two hours a week unpaid commute. Doesn't make any sense for the job that can be done remotely. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Danica Dupati, and I'm a compliance monitoring analyst with the Employment Development Department, and I highly encourage you to support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Jesspreet Kaur. I'm a Research Data Specialist with the Department of Social Services and a member of SEIU, Local 1,000, And I'm here in support of AB 1729 and respectfully urge you to support the bill. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Charlene Villanueva with the Department of Social Services as an analyst too. And I am also an SEIU member, and I kindly ask that you support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Payman Alamy, Senior Engineer with the State Water Resources Control Board and also a proud PEG member. I'm here to support AB 1729, and I urge you to vote yes. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Michael Baker. I'm a Senior Scientist and Subject Matter Expert at Cal Fire. Proud member of the California Association of Professional Scientists, an affiliate of the UAW, Local 1115. My fellow scientists at Cal Fire and I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Felipe La Luz. I'm a Senior Environmental Scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and I respectfully request that you help us achieve our mission and support AB 1729. Thank you.

Good morning. Marcus Persaud. I work at California Department of Public Health as an accountant. I live over 60 miles away in Sutter County, and right now it's unaffordable to drive to my worksite four days a week. So I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hi, everyone. I'm Nia Nguyen, and I'm a proud member of SEIU Local 1,000. I and, I really encourage you all to support this bill, and encourage you all to vote yes on it. You know, just think about the 90,000 extra cars, vehicles on the road, and how much less stress you would be, trying to get to work every So I encourage you to vote yes on this bill, and I support it wholeheartedly. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Patty Blaschaw. I work for California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hello. I'm Benjamin Lester, and I work as a tax technician for the Franchise Tax Board. And I urge you to support 1729 because I live, like, almost thirty minutes to an hour away, and it's just not feasible. You know what I mean? Like, it gas is so expensive with Donald Trump's war in The Middle East.

You know? The whole world's gas prices have gone up, and it doesn't make sense for us to spend so much money just so that we can be near businesses.

Thank you.

Yeah.

We wanna make sure we get to everyone's comment. Thank you for that. Just your name and affiliation and position. Thank you.

Susanna Gandy with California Department of Public Health. I'm a health physicist, proud member of CAPS UAW, asking you guys to join us in support of this bill.

Hi. I'm Trent Rosenquist. I'm an Associate Health Physicist at the California Department of Public Health, and I urge you to support this bill.

Hi. Katrina Campos. I'm an analyst with Department of Conservation and an SEIU member, and I urge you to support the bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Natalia Salva. I work for the Department of Conservation as well as IT specialist, And I'm here to support AB 1729, and I ask you to support us in this and urge you a wealth. Yes. Thank you so much.

Good morning. My name is Valentina Kalaniuk, and I work for the Department of Conservation as well. And I'm respectfully asking you to support AB 1729. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Elena Nikam, an MIT project manager for Department of Conservation. I would like to ask you and beg you, please, support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is George Wakey. I'm a, procurement analyst for Department of Conservation, and I'm here in support of AB 1729, and I respectfully request a US vote for this important bill. Thank you.

Good morning. Brandon Brown, a store with CAPSUAW and a risk assessor for the Department of Pesticide Regulation, and I urge you to support the bill.

Hi. Brendan Darcy, Research Ecientist and epidemiologist with the Department of Pesticide Regulation and member of CAPTUAW. I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Kirsta Perley. I'm an attorney with the Department of Housing and Community Development, a member of CASE, and I urge you to support the bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is John DeRosa. I'm also an attorney with the Department of Housing and Community Development and a case union Member. Strongly urge your support of this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Michael Young. I also work for eight, housing community development. I'm attorney, and I urge and hope that you guys will support this bill. Thank you.

I'm Eric Payne. I'm a scientist with Cal-Recycle, part of CAPS ARW, and I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair. My name is Nick Cruz. I work at the Department of Health Care Services, and I'm a proud member of SIEU Local 1,000. I'm in strong support of this bill, and I respectfully urge an Aye vote. Thank you.

Hello. Lorraine Frias, Department of Health Care Services. I urge a a yes on this bill and to please, please, please consider the health inequities that return to work is causing in our offices. Thank you so much.

Good morning. My name is Luke Bernthal. I'm an attorney with the Victim Compensation Board, and a CASE union member, and I respectfully urge an Aye vote on this bill. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Amber Villegas. I'm a structural design technician at the Department of Transportation, and I urge you to vote yes on this bill.

Good morning. My name is Trevor Pratt. I'm an administrative law judge with the Public Utilities Commission, and and I'm asking for your support on this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Kyle Shimpke, and I'm an environmental scientist for the Department of Toxic Substances Control and a proud member of CAPS AAW. I strongly encourage you to to support AB 1729. Thank you.

Hi. Steven Najjar. I work for ITB at EDD. I support this AB 1729. I respectfully urge your vote for this one. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Guggenidra. I work for California Air Resource Board. I'm analyst too, and I urge you guys to support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Tali Kingsnorth. I'm an attorney for the California Department of Public Health and here with CASE. I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Kirsten Arnold. I'm an attorney four with the Department of Managed Health Care. I'm here with CASE, and I encourage you to support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Lauren Ocadis. I'm an attorney three with the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, and I strongly urge your support for this vote this bill. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Edgar Guerra with SEIU California, proud cosponsor. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Peter Chao. I'm an attorney three with the California Public Utilities Commission with the case union. I urge you to to vote yes on this, bill. Thank you.

Michael Sapoznikoff, deputy attorney general, also a member of CASE. Please support the bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Jeri Rinsfield. I'm an IT specialist with the California Department of Public Health. I support this bill and ask you also to support it. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Patricia Kelly. I'm an attorney for with the Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, also known as the Labor Commissioner's Office, and we urge you to vote yes on the bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Alicia Johnson. I'm an attorney four with the California Department of Public Health. I'm a member of CASE, and I strongly urge you to vote Aye on this bill. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Corey Dutra. I'm an attorney four at the California Department of Social Services. In July, it'll be twenty years. I respectfully request you to vote Aye today. Thank you.

Hello. I'm Serena Rose. I'm with the GIR for the WCAB, and I've come all the way from Los my name I'd like to support the bill. I come all the way from Los Angeles.

Good morning. My name is Madison Boynton. I'm an environmental scientist at the State Water Resources Control Board and proud member of CAPS, UAW one one one five, and I urge you to support this bill. Thank you for your time.

Good morning. I'm Peter Haupp. I'm an environmental scientist with the State Water Board. I urge you to support this bill.

Good morning. I'm Jill Zimmerman. I'm an attorney with the Department of Toxic Substances Control, and I support this bill. I hope you will as well.

Good morning. My name is Ivan Wagner. I'm an attorney with the Department of Housing and Community Development, and I respectfully urge you to vote Aye on AB 1729.

Hello. My name is Chris Sturmer. I work for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and, I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. Amy Olsen. I'm a senior scientist with, Fish and Wildlife, and a proud member of CAPS UAW, and I strongly urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Christine Lucky Akamine. I am a legislative analyst with the Employment Development Department, and I strongly urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hi. I'm Chelsea Lunsford. I'm with the employment development development department as a legislative analyst, and I strongly support this bill.

Good morning. I'm Katrina Smith, a senior scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and a proud member of CAPS UAW, and I ask for your support in this bill.

Hello. My name is Steven Van. I work for the California Energy Commission in decarbonization and affordable housing, and I urge everyone to support Assembly Bill 1729. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Chenbo Zhang at, I'm a staff at Tax College in the Department of Pest Regulation. I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Benjamin Tuggy. I work on clean transportation at the California Energy Commission, CAPS UAW member. I support AB 1729. Thank you.

Hi there. My name is Forrest Hanson. I'm an environmental scientist and project biologist with the California Department of, Water Resources. I live here in Sacramento, and I urge you to vote yes on AB 1729. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Tina Riley, and I'm a maternal mortality research scientist staff with CDPH, and I urge you to support this bill. I also support CAPS UAW as a steward.

My name is Marisol Paskier. I am a injury epidemiologist with the Department of Public Health and a proud member of CAP UAW, and I urge all of you to support this bill.

Hi. My name is Carolyn Zambrano. I'm a adolescent health, research scientist at the California Department of Public Health, and I ask you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Alexander Yeh. I'm an environmental scientist at the Department of Pesticide Regulation, and I strongly urge you to support this bill.

Hi. My name is Anne Hilborn. I'm with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and Environmental Scientist. I'm a steward with CAPS UAW, and I urge you to support this bill. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Hannah Johnson. I'm a proud CAPS UAW member. I work at preventing the transmission of infectious diseases for the California Department of Public Health, and I strongly encourage you all to support this bill. Thank you.

Hi, everybody. My name is Kara Drake, and I'm a research scientist with California Department of Public Health, and I strongly urge you to support this bill for all of us. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Megan Melnick. I'm a Senior Environmental Scientist at DTSC and a member of CAPS UAW 1115. I'm here in support of AB 1729, and I urge your support with an Aye vote. Thank you.

Hi. My name is Laura Patterson. I'm the statewide amphibian reptile conservation coordinator for the Department of Fish and Wildlife and a proud CAPS UAW local one of or 1115 member. I urge you to vote Aye on this bill.

Hi. Jason Van Cort, research scientist supervisor, Department of Healthcare Services. RTO is killing morale. I have half my staff working at home, half coming to I drove two hours this morning. Please support this bill. Thank you.

Kai. Ashita Mohandas, an attorney at Office of Administrative Law and member of CASE. My job consists of reading regulatory packages, writing memos, and attending teams meetings, which I do the same as at home and in the office. Please support this bill. Thank you.

Jason Felina, attorney for the Office of Administrative Law, and I support this bill, and I urge you too as well. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair, Members. James O'Malley with AFSCME California, and we are proud cosponsors. Thank you.

Good morning. Steven Mallett. I'm an attorney with the Office of Administrative Law. I urge you to support this bill, and I do as well. Thank you.

Samantha Teder with the Department of Corrections Office of Business Service. I'm a steward for the building. And on behalf of the 100 plus employees, we urge you to support this bill, please.

Good morning, committee. My name is Crystal Coles. I work for the Department of Housing and Community Development, and I'm a proud board of directors member with SEIU Local 1,000. I strongly strongly urge you guys to support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is David Jimenez, Vice President for SEIU Local 1,000, proud state worker for the Department of Social Services, and I ask for your support on this bill. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Matt Gaugher. I'm the Vice President of CASE. I'm also an administrative law judge with the ALRB, and I support this bill. Thank you.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Mahedi Chaudhry. I am a transportation planner with Caltrans, and I can tell you that my VMT has increased significantly even with a hybrid schedule. This bill is a step in the right direction, and I urge you to support it. Thank you.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Tiffany Whiten with SEIU California in support. Thank you.

Morning, Chair, Members. Elmer Lizardi with the California Federation of Labor Unions in support.

Good morning, Chair, Members. Mario Guerrero with California Faculty Association in support.

Okay. Wow. Do we have any more #MeToo's? Okay. Seeing none, we will move to opposition.

Are there opposition witnesses here to testify? Seeing none, any opposition #MeToos? Okay. Seeing none, we will come to our Members, dais Members. Questions, comments?

I have no questions. Do we have a quorum? I just came in. Okay. Oh. I was gonna offer a motion.

Well, when the time is right, we will take note of that. We'll do we'll press repeat. I just wanna say to all of the witnesses who gave testimony to all of the workers who came out, it is always impressive to see the cross section of the people who do the business of the people for the state of California. And I really wanna thank the author for bringing this bill forward.

Where the state goes in this very complex discussion about how we will do work in the future, and where we will do that work, and how do we do it in a way that saves our environment? How do we do that in a way that also saves our commercial corridors?

How do we do this in a way to give workers dignity and some control over their time and how they approach their working conditions? Very, very valuable discussion today, and that's why I support this bill. I understand the concerns and pressures that the administration, the governor has has raised. I've heard of also from local leaders in Los Angeles about this this question as well.

We do recognize that our urban and commercial corridors are going through some pretty hard times, just like working people are going through, pretty hard times.

And given all of the the, hostility from this administration in Washington, we know the cost of living, whether it's gas, whether it's food, whether it's, you know, the cost of electricity and utilities. All of these things weigh in on how workers are best able to support themselves and their families, while doing, the work in the business, of the state.

It is and has to be especially frustrating, for workers, our state workers to pay more to come into town to work in buildings to provide a service and the level of productivity that they have been able to do, while at home through Zoom and through other technologies. It's also, a real demand on your time, unpaid time, to be commuting in and out of your neighborhoods into, our urban corridors, to commercial spaces where we know, time is money. Time is the most valuable thing that we have.

And and so I say all of this to say that I support this bill. I think this bill is very important. I think that, where this conversation lands is going to be important not just for public sector, but but for private sector as well. I think this is a step in the right direction. I think having flexibility is critical and key, and this bill does exactly that.

We can do better by our state workers and that is letting their voices be heard, in in this determination of of how California will do its business moving forward. And for all these reasons, I will support the bill when we have a full quorum. We are in between a number of committees today. We will take this bill up, and I will give you the opportunity to close Assembly Member.

Well, first, I wanna thank the Senator and the member for your support of this bill. I think this is an incredibly important bill for not our state capacity, but our state employee morale. I also wanna thank all of our state employees and and workers who have traveled near and far to come testify for this bill and each hearing that we're having for these things. I know some people come very, very far.

And I really wanna thank them because it's not often that we have the joy and the privilege to actually see the people who day in, day out carry out the big ambitions we have to state.

I know now we're in the budget season, so we just see many of your departments as line items and and a giant budget. But it's really, truly amazing privilege to see the people who work so hard and give up so much to actually make our state the most competitive, the most welcoming state in the union, and if not, the world.

And I find a lot of joy in that being able to meet so many of you, and even many of you live in my district too, which is an amazing commute you'd have to do, because I know it. But, you know, this bill kinda boils down to one thing, is really reflecting the modern reality of the workplace. As legislators, I know we have often complained many meetings could have been an email.

Right? So we don't need to always be there, constantly always there in person. But when we are in person, it's those meetings and those collaborations are more meaningful. The reality is so many people work so many jobs that can be done remotely, and it can cut down on commute time, carbon pollution, and more time to afford for their families and for their loved ones.

And I think as we grapple with affordability crisis, we're gonna make sure that our downtowns and urban cores are not places where workers have to be, but where workers want to be.

And that's incumbent on us and local and every policy makers to make them vibrant downtowns that families wanna go to on the weekends, people wanna go during nightlife, and people also, of course, wanna go on their lunch break. So I think it's not fair to shackle our office workers to be the entire bedrock for our downtowns. And I think from talking to a lot of state workers, they're probably not the best demographic to have disposable income to spend on very high risky things constantly.

But I think it is really important to revitalize the downtowns in a way that's inclusive and welcoming to everyone. And really thinking about affordability again, how many people have moved either to be back home to their family in more expensive areas or more affordable areas that are further away from metro areas.

And that is a reality. And I think the governor did a really good thing six years ago when he created this innovative innovative work style. And all we're asking with this bill is to preserve that and let every department figure out for themselves what is the right mix of telework. Because we're not saying everyone has telework and everyone no one ever comes out of the office. We're saying what is the right mix?

What is the right mix of flexibility? And again, I wanna thank the chair for your support and all the workers who have come out here. And, at the appropriate time, I'll ask for your strong Aye support. Thank you.

Okay. I think we were just trying to clear everyone out from that last file item.

Looks like we are ready to move on to our file item number two. I see Assembly member Jackson is here.

If you have witnesses, they are welcome to sit at the front table.

Thank you for that. Okay. Assembly member, you may begin.

[no audio]

In brief, the bill would direct California's labor workforce development agency to work with the County of Riverside to make electric vehicle manufacturing jobs and education more accessible in one of the fastest growing regions in the state. Respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Well, thank you.

I told you.

And we don't have support witnesses. Any support me too's? Name and affiliation, please.

Thank you, Madam chair. Jean Hurst here today on behalf of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in support.

Thank you. We will move I don't see any other me too's. We'll move to opposition witnesses. Are there any opposition witnesses here today?

Seeing none. Any opposition me too speakers? Okay.

We do not have a quorum yet, and we will certainly be taking this up once we get our fellow members here. Any comments from from the dais?

No. I'll be happy to move it if you wanna note that when the time comes.

[no audio] you may close.

Respectfully ask for an aye vote.

Appreciate your time and getting us back on time. Okay. We are I don't see assembly. We are looking for authors in Senate Labor Public Employment and retirement, Assemblymember Fong, Ortega, Valencia, Caluza, Berman, Gipson, Connolly, Schivo, Pellerin, Petrie Norris. Come on down.

We're ready. All authors, please report to Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement. Okay. Wonderful. We are ready to move to file item number three, AB 805.

I see assembly member Fong is with us. Whenever you're ready, Assemblymember, if you have witnesses, they're welcome to sit at the table at this time. And please begin.

Good morning, Madam chair and senators. I will be taking the amendments listed in the analysis. Thank you so much to the committee staff for their assistance with this bill. Apprenticeships are our proven pathway to good paying careers because they combine classroom learning with paid hands on work experience.

In 2022, SB 191 established youth apprenticeship as a state priority and directed the Division of Apprenticeship Standards, also known as DAS, to convene a working group to develop recommendations for expanding youth apprenticeships.

Senator Durazo was instrumental in advancing that effort and the development of the California Youth Apprenticeship Model Report. Assembly Bill 805 implements a key recommendation from that report by establishing the career apprenticeship bridge program.

This bill connects high school career technical education with registered apprenticeships, allowing students to earn paid work experience and college credit while still in high school. Assembly Bill 805 lays the foundation for DAS, schools, employers, and regional partners to build and expand youth apprenticeship programs statewide.

Here to speak and support are Edgar Castillo with Unite LA and Sally Ching with the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color. Thank you.

Thank you. And you each have two minutes.

Hello? Okay. Thank you. Good morning, chair, members of the committee. My name is Edgar Castillo. The Senior Manager for Workforce Development of Policy and Systems at United LA, and I'm proud to speak today in support of AB 805 as a cosponsor along with the California Opportunity Youth Network, the Alliance of Boys and Men of Color, and Youth Will.

In November of last year, the California Youth Apprenticeship Committee convened by the Division of Apprenticeship Standards released its report, the California Youth Apprenticeship Model, which includes recommendations to expand youth apprenticeship programs focused on strengthening the state's workforce and closing the skills gap.

AB 805 implements a key recommendation from the final report that the creation of the career apprenticeship bridge program. The committee spent more than a year bringing together education, workforce, labor, employer, and youth leaders to design a youth apprenticeship system, and the CAP program emerged as a central strategy for connecting high school students to college level apprenticeships and career pathways.

Importantly, it is the intent of this bill that outreach, recruitment, retention, and support efforts prioritize youth and young adults who face barriers to educational attainment or employment, ensuring these opportunities are accessible to those who can benefit most.

AB 805 also recognizes the successful implementation requires strong local partnerships. The bill directs us to help work county, work with county and regional intermediaries to coordinate and expand career apprenticeship bridge programs across California by creating stronger pathways between education and apprenticeship while improving coordination among partners.

AB 805 will help more young people access high quality earn and learn opportunities to meet California's workforce needs. We respectfully ask for your support today. Thank you.

Good morning, chair and members. My name is Sally Ching. I'm the Policy Director with the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color, which is a statewide network of more than 200 organizations working to improve outcomes for boys and men of color, their families, and communities across California.

We are proud cosponsors of AB 805 alongside Assemblymember Fong, Unite LA, the California Opportunity Youth Network, and Youth Will. For ABMC, youth apprenticeship is about more than workforce development.

It's about ensuring that young people, particularly those who have been historically, you know, facing barriers and opportunities, and who have been disconnected, have access to real pathways to quality employment, mentorship, and the opportunity to live self determined lives.

Across California, we continue to see a troubling disconnect. Employers in critical industries are searching for talent while young people are struggling to access the networks, experiences, and opportunities that lead to good jobs.

Apprenticeship has long been one of the most effective ways to bridge that gap by allowing people to earn while they learn, build skills, and enter careers without taking on significant debt. AB 805 helps strengthen that pathway by creating the career apprenticeship bridge program and providing students with earlier exposure to apprenticeship opportunities and career connected learning.

Just as importantly, the bill recognizes that successful youth apprenticeship that successful youth apprenticeship systems require strong partnerships among schools, employers, labor, community organizations, and regional intermediaries working together to support young people's success.

As a member of the California Youth Apprenticeship Committee, ABMOC was proud to participate in the collaborative process that informs this legislation. The committee brought together labor, employers, educators, workforce leaders, community organizations, and youth representatives to develop recommendations for a stronger statewide youth apprenticeship system.

AB 805 reflects an important step towards implementing that vision. For working families across California, access to high quality career pathways can be a life changing experience. This bill helps create stronger connections between education, apprenticeship, and employment while investing in the next generation of California's workforce. We respectfully ask for your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Just on time.

Appreciate that. Are there any me toos in support of this bill? Please step forward and state your name and affiliation.

Good morning. Ruth Sosa on behalf of Power CA Action in support.

Nicole Morales on behalf of Children Now in strong support.

Puja Lal on behalf of NextGen California in support.

Hello. Sophia Quach on behalf of the Bay Area Council in support.

Good morning. Lee Angela Reed on behalf of CAROCP the California Association of Career and College Readiness Organizations in strong support. Thanks.

Michael Henning on behalf of the California Alliance of Child and Family Services in support.

We'll now move to opposition. Are there any opposition key witnesses? If so, please come to the table.

Okay. Seeing none, any opposition me too's in the audience?

Okay. Seeing none, we will come to the dais members. Any comments, questions?

Okay. Well, Assemblymember, we don't have a quorum yet.

We are acting as a subcommittee. When the time is right, we will bring this back to the members for a vote. In the meantime, would you like to close?

Thank you so much, Madam chair and senators. I really appreciate all the comments from our lead witnesses as well. Would certainly ask for an aye vote when appropriate. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. We are going to go back to file order, and that is file item number five and six. We will take up together and that's Assembly member Ortega.

Any witnesses you have are welcome to sit at the table for file item number five.

Thank you, Madam Chair and senators, for the opportunity to present AB 1576 today. AB 1576 makes necessary reforms to the subsequent injury benefit trust fund. This bill makes a series of thoughtful changes that will reduce litigation costs, reduce medical legal costs, and reduce the number of one hundred percent disability cases. The cumulative impact will reduce employer assessments by 20 to twenty five percent while maintaining the lessened financial risk to employers who give previously disabled workers a second chance.

My witness today is former Assemblymember Alberto Torrico with the California Applicants Attorneys Association.

Mister Torrico, you have two minutes.

Good morning, Madam Chair. Thank you. I wanna thank the author for her work on this important topic. I think the bill is a it's a reflection and a and an understanding that there is a serious problem with the SIBTF. I will note that the administrate that the problem is it has many roots, but a couple of them are severe staffing shortages in the agency.

That's acknowledged by the administration because they've requested more staff in their budget, and I think the legislature has, has granted those the requests. And it's also stems larger from the from the decision in the case called Todd, t o d d, which significantly expanded the eligibility of of workers to apply for the SIBTF program.

This bill takes many of the RAND recommendations and and applies them to significantly reduce not only the cost as as mentioned by Assemblymember Ortega, but also the number of cases that can be processed. One of the biggest challenges and one of the biggest objections that we have to the administration's proposal is that they wanna apply these the changes they're looking for retroactively. They wanna apply them to all of the 30 25 to 35,000 cases that are open.

Many of them many of those cases have been litigated over many, many years. In our in our research, we have never found an instance where workers' comp benefits were either increased or decreased retroactively. Those were always prospective. So the notion that these benefits would be cut after years of litigation and after years of workers going through the process seems completely unfair. We also note that the Todd decision is it's not a court decision.

It's a it's a decision brought by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, which is entirely made up of gubernatorial appointees. It was a unanimous decision. We we are ready to to try to resolve this problem. We think this this approach the approach in this bill is much better than what the administration has proposed, but we do recognize there is an issue, and we and we hope to find a resolution either through this bill or through the budget process.

But because of the magnitude of this situation, we think a a bill is a much more appropriate venue.

Thank you. Respect for that, Fernando.

Thank you. Are there any other me too's in support of this bill? Please state your name and affiliation at the mic.

Thank you madam chair

and Senator. Evan Korder on behalf of the California Coalition of Injured Workers in support.

Thank you. Any others? Okay. We will move to opposition. Here's opposition key witnesses.

Please come and take a seat at the table.

Thank you, madam chair and members. My name is Jason Schmelzer. I'm here today on behalf of the California Coalition on Workers' Compensation and Public Risk Innovation Solutions and Management or PRISM. We are respectfully opposed, to AB 1576 by Assemblymember Ortega, but I do wanna take a moment to thank the Assemblymember for her efforts. We disagree on the bill, but she was the first person in the in the legislature to raise the issue and attempt to do something about it.

So I just wanna acknowledge that here at the beginning. We may disagree with the assembly member and her sponsors about the details of her proposal. We are we are quite thankful that the legislature as a whole and the Newsom administration have stepped up to fix what is clearly broken. The analysis does a great job of walking through the history of the subsequent injuries benefit trust fund and the importance of the fund to the workers who need it, those

that

it was intended for. What we have today is an entirely unintended litigation free for all that has led to bad results all around. For the injured workers who should access the fund, it means longer wait times to get their claims processed and a delay in their benefits. For the state that bears the administrative burden, it means an ever increasing workload that is quite difficult and expensive to manage. And for the private and public sector employers that fund the SIBTF, it means massive and mounting liability.

Again, we wanna thank the legislature for working through the problem. If we're looking for a comprehensive solution that resolves all of the issues with the SIBTF, we don't feel AB 1576 is is the right choice. Governor Newsom's proposed trailer bill, on the other hand, addresses all of the issues outlined in the RAND and LAO reports, and we would prefer that, as an outcome. Mike I have Michael Pisani here today.

Michael is the claims manager from the school's insurance authority, and we'll walk through the sort of substantive differences between the two proposals.

You may proceed.

Good afternoon, madam chair and members. I'm here today on behalf of Schools Insurance Authority as a member of CCWC in opposition to AB 1576. School districts across California are facing significant financial pressures. In addition to rising costs subsequent legislation, districts are now confronting rapidly increasing SIBTF assessments. These pressures are directly diverting resources away from classrooms, student services, and staffing.

These are fixed costs that must be paid, and schools can regrettably only spend each dollar once. Every additional dollar spent on the SI BTF is a dollar that can't be spent on students. The recent amendments to AB 1576 moved the bill significantly backwards. They removed the improvements that had previously been incorporated by the author and largely returned the bill to the framework that was viewed out by the governor last year.

More importantly, AB 1576 does not address the core concerns identified by the RAND study and the legislative analyst office.

RAND and the LAO identified primary drivers behind the explosive growth in the SIBTF costs and recommended structural reforms to restore the program to its intended purpose. The administration's trailer bill directly addresses those recommendations. AB 1576 does not. The result is a system that now faces approximately $30,000,000,000 in existing liability that continues to add 2 to 3,000,000,000 every year. Those costs only fall on public entities throughout California, including schools, cities and counties, and the state itself.

There are important technical differences between AB 1576 and the trailer bill, and I'd be happy to answer any questions about that. However, at a high level, the choice before the legislature is whether to pursue comprehensive reforms recommended recommended by land, supported by the legislative analyst office and advanced by the administration, or to continue with the proposal that does not address the underlying causes of this fiscal crisis. My grandma always told me difficult work doesn't get easier by waiting. That's exactly what we're facing here.

If we don't address this problem today, we'll continue to pay for it tomorrow at a much greater cost.

For these reasons, we respectfully oppose AB 1576 and support the trailer bill.

Thank you. Are there any other opposition me twos in the audience? Please step to the mic and state your name and affiliation.

Mark Segment with the American Property Casual Insurance Association, also opposed.

Clifton Wilson on behalf of the Board of Supervisors for Fresno and Kern, both in opposition. Thank you. Good morning. Eric Lohr on behalf of the California State Association of Counties in respectful opposition. Thank you.

Andy Lebenbaum, County of Los Angeles. We align our opposition to PRISM. Thank you very much.

Chair, Senator Dean Grafiel with Capital Advocacy here on behalf of the California Hospital Association opposed to AB 1576. Thank you.

Good morning. Andrea Lynch on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce and respectful opposition.

Sarah Deque on behalf of the Rural County representatives of California in opposition.

Matthew Easley, on behalf of the Associated General Contractors of California and as well as the San Diego chapter, in opposition. Thank you.

Okay. That looks like the end of our Me Too's. Members member You need no comment? Okay. We are in a subcommittee.

Obviously, we're waiting for our quorum to get established and we will take this bill up, shortly. Would you like to close, assembly member?

Yes. Thank you, madam chair and member, for the opportunity to present today. I also wanna thank the opposition, for their remarks and acknowledging the fact that I have taken on, such a big issue in a, you know, in a couple of years have been working on this issue because it is comprehensive, it is massive, and it should be transparent.

What the opposition felt to mention is that they're currently trying to move this through the trailer bill process, which does not allow for us to have these kinds of conversations and input. And that's why you have this bill before you today.

And when the time comes, I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you very much. And we will be taking it up shortly.

Thank you. Thank you.

And now, are you we're gonna move to your next bill, assembly member file item number six.

Thank you, again, Madam Chair and Members, for allowing me to present AB 1582 today. For decades, the University of California has contracted out service worker jobs and replaced them with cheaper labor. In 2020, AFSCME 3299 and UC aligned signed a contract establishing a general prohibition on contracting out of workers at UC.

Under the agreement, should UC decide to outsource jobs and a disagreement arises, the outsourcing contract must be reviewed in an expedited arbitration. Despite this agreement, UC has disregarded any arbitrator decision they do not like. AB 1582 makes it an unfair labor practice for a higher education employer to circumvent or disregard an arbitrator's decision or refuse to schedule arbitrations in a timely manner.

The bill also requires relief for a violation of these provisions to include the charging party's attorney's fees and costs. My witnesses today in support are Andrew Martinez with AFSCME Local 3299 and Kate Hallward, AFSCME 3299 counsel, to help answer any questions.

Thank you, and you each have two minutes.

Good morning. My name is Andrew Martinez. I work at UCLA as a senior custodian. On behalf of AFSCME 3299, the frontline service workers at the University of California, we support the bill. For decades, UC has contracted out our jobs and replaced us with lower paid people who didn't get decent benefits.

Today, our collective bargaining agreements have an arbitration process to settle disputes related to contracting out our jobs. UC is ignoring this agreed upon process and ignoring the agreed upon arbitrator's decisions. So even if we win at arbitration, UC doesn't allow for an arbitrator's decision and instead makes us do it all over again and again at our own expense and years of delay. So even if we win at arbitration... I'm sorry. Apologize.

At UCLA, it took us four years, three arbitrations, and a court ruling. This was for cafeteria workers who were contracted out by a UC and shouldn't have been. Workers will never get back what was lost over those four years. This bill won't reopen any underlying dispute, and it won't change what happened. We are asking that future arbitration decisions mean something. Thank you for your consideration.

Good morning, Chair and Member. My name is Kate Hallward. I'm counsel to AFSCME 3299, and I'm here for any technical questions that you may have.

Thank you. I see we have some me toos in support of this bill. Please step to the mic, each state your name and affiliation.

Good morning. My name is Jasmine Koen. I am a certified occupational therapy assistant and member of 3299, and I support this bill.

Good morning. I'm Veronica Rendon, pharmacy technician, also a member of AFSCME 3299, and I support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Norma Alvarez, and I'm a pharmacy technician. And I'm also part of AFSCME 3299, and I support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Brenda Mendoza, member of AFSCME 3299, and I'm a hospital unit service coordinator, and I support this bill.

My name is Stori Johnson, and I'm a LVN, and I'm a member of AFSCME 3299, and I support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Debra Gutierrez, and I'm a patient service coordinator, also a member of 3299, and I support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Johnisha Hosley. I'm a medical assistant. I am also a member of AFSCME 3299, and I am in support of this bill.

Good morning. My name is Elrika Aritonang, and I am a mental health worker and also a member of AFSCME 3299. I stand in support of AB 1582.

Hi. My name is Francine Cruz. I'm a senior custodian. I'm a member of AFSCME 3299, and I am in support.

Good morning. My name is Arushni Devi, and my job title is senior custodian, and I'm a member of AFSCME 3299. I stand in support of AB 1582. Thank you.

Good morning. I'm Dallas. I'm a PSR and member of AFSCME 3299. I support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Tamara. I am in support of 1582 for AFSCME 3299.

Good morning. My name is Dawn Rivera. I'm a patient service representative and with AFSCME 3299, and I support this bill.

Good morning. My name is Angelina Velasquez. I'm a food service worker and a member of 3299, and I support this bill.

Matt Broad for Teamsters California in support. Thank you.

Janice O'Malley, AFSCME California, in strong support. Thank you.

Good morning. Doug Subers on behalf of the California State University Employees Union in support. Thanks.

Jason Henderson on behalf of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges in support. Thank you.

Elmer Lizardi on behalf of the California Federation of Labor Unions in support.

Mario Guerrero on behalf of the California Faculty Association in support. Thank you.

Randy Perry on behalf of PORAC in support.

Catherine Vierra Houston, United Steel Workers District 12, in support.

Okay. That concludes our support witnesses. Do we have opposition witnesses here today? Key witnesses, you may have a seat at the table. Thank you. Support witnesses.

And you both have two minutes. Okay.

Good morning, Madame Chair and members of the committee. My name is Melissa Mattiella, associate vice president for system wide employee and labor relations for the University of California. The university must continue to oppose AB 1582 for three fundamental reasons. First, the UC and AFSCME have recently negotiated a collective bargaining agreement and settlement agreements related to Article five.

The union should not be able to use the legislative process to get concessions from the university that it was not able to obtain at the table, nor should it be able to unilaterally rewrite the party's collective bargaining agreements.

Second, this bill is not necessary. The party's agreements have negotiated an agreement agreed upon remedies for arbitrator decisions, including contract termination. Third, the bill punishes patients and students by creating a blunt and

most across our system. Going AFSCME did carefully negotiate a comprehensive contracting out framework found in Article five. That agreement explicitly balances a shared commitment to our internal work force with narrow and common sense vital exceptions, including for emergencies, temporary staffing shortages, and operational continuity. It also requires requires UC to pay wage and benefit parity to all of these outside workers. Just last month, after two and a half years of negotiations, the party successfully reached an agreement for these critical workers.

unnecessary ban on critical services at a time when they are needed

Notably, during those two and a half years, 1582's provisions did not come up in negotiations nor did they come up in the several recent settlement agreements the parties negotiated regarding remediation processes for Article five. Second, Article AB 1582 is not required. Article five, again, already contains robust agreed upon remedies for violations. And I wanted to say explicitly, arbitrators can console cancel contracts.

And under our settlement agreements, we have agreed to contract provisions that require termination and then also have a remediation framework should the UC not provide wage and benefit parity to these workers.

Third and most importantly, this does prevent us from providing patient and, student services at a time when they're needed most across the system. This would mean that one violation of the more than 50 compliance obligations in Article five and the related obligations could cut services at a time when they're needed most. And with that, I'll turn it over to Christine.

Thank you. Good afternoon, chair and member of the committee. My name is Christine Williams, and I am the chief nursing executive at UC Davis Health. I am here to voice the university's opposition to Assembly Bill 1582 due to the severe direct risks it poses to patient care and hospital operations. As a level one adult pediatric trauma center and primary safety net provider, UC Davis Health operates a fluid twenty four hour environment.

To maintain safe patient care, we rely we rely on the narrow critical exceptions present in Regions Policy five four zero two and Article five of our labor agreements. These terms explicitly allow us to contract for temporary services, including during acute staffing shortages, public health emergencies, and unforeseen patient surges. AB 1582 threatens to cripple this operational lifeline.

Because the bill would apply a localized penalty, a contracting dispute or minor infraction at a hospital department could trigger a blanket prohibition on same or similar contracted services at the entire UC Davis Health facility here in Sacramento. If UC Davis Health is locked into a systematic ban and prohibited from utilizing specialized contract staffing or emergency support during a shortage, the consequences will be real and immediate.

It will create severe operational body necks, dangerously increase ED wait times, and force us to divert or deny critical patients who need us the most. Three examples of vulnerable patient populations reliant on us are neonatal transplant and burn specialty care services to name just a few. These patients rely on specialized, flexible, and rapidly deployable care teams to respond to unpredictable and often life threatening patient needs. In neonatal care, acuity and volume shift abruptly.

Having the right care teams are, needed to prevent adverse outcomes in these very vulnerable, critically small infants.

Similarly, transplant services operate within narrow clinical windows. Timing is imperative, and the inability to mobilize appropriate teams will impact organ viability and patient survival. Burn care requires intensive resource heavy interventions. The inability to scale staffing could compromise both patient outcomes and staff safety in highly demanding care settings.

Which minutes is that? Please wrap wrap your screen and now.

For the sake of our patients, we respectfully request your no vote on AB 1582.

Thank you. Are there any opposition me twos out there? Please state your name and affiliation.

Good morning. Andrea Lynch on behalf of the California Chamber of Commerce in respectful opposition.

Jean Hurst here today on behalf of the California Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems in respectful opposition.

Sophia Quach on behalf of the Bay Area Council in respectful opposition.

Eric Baku at the California State University in respectful opposition.

That looks like it concludes our Opposition Me Too's. Any statements, comments? We are, again, in our still in our subcommittee, form, and we'll take this up later when members come. And I wanna appreciate the author for bringing this, this bill forward. It's, incredibly important that we do all that we can to protect the arbitration process and, and to support workers through that, effort.

I know this is a dual referred to judiciary next and so, I will make sure that we bring this up when when our quorum is in place and with that, you may close.

When it's appropriate, I would like to ask for an aye vote.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. We are gonna establish a quorum, and then we will move to assembly member Calusa, who's been waiting patiently.

Senator Small Cuevas?

Present.

Small Cuevas present. Senator Strickland?

Here.

Strickland here. Senator Cortese? Here. Cortese here. Glazer?

Laird?

Okay. We have a form. So we will move to assembly member Calusa. Please come forward. If you have witnesses, they are welcome to sit at the at the front table.

You may proceed.

Good morning. Thank you, chair and senators of the committee for this opportunity to present AB 1630. Thank you as well to the committee consultants and staff for all your hard work on this bill.

AB 1630 authorizes union representatives to invite members of the bargaining unit to observe meet and confer sessions. It's a thoughtful and balanced measure that strengthens transparency, trust, and engagement in the collective bargaining process, while maintaining the integrity of negotiations and respecting the realities faced by public employers.

For many workers, collective bargaining can feel out of reach, something that happens behind closed doors with outcomes that deeply affect their livelihoods, yet without clear visibility into how some of those decisions are made. Allowing more members of the bargaining unit to observe negotiations remotely, build meaningful trust in union leadership, and strengthen solidarity across the bargaining unit.

And ultimately, this will foster more informed and engaged workplaces. We believe that in the bargaining process, and it can be improved when more union members have the opportunities to engage.

And for this bill specifically, we know that some members of the bargaining unit, have really demanding schedules that do not allow for them to be there in person, like our medical residents and our internist. And so allowing them the flexibility to observe remotely is critically important to their participation. With me to testify in support is Sandra Barreiro with SEIU California.

Thank you, and you have two minutes.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members. Sandra Barreiro on behalf of SEIU California. We are the sponsors of this bill. Between 50% and 70% of medical residents experience depression and burnout. It's largely due to the demands of their schedules and also being placed in areas where they have no existing social support network.

The Union is a social support network. It provides a sense of belonging and also control over one's working conditions. However, medical residents still can't access, meaningful Union participation due to the demands of their schedule. This bill would make Union participation more accessible by providing remote observers a way to observe without participating in local bargaining sessions.

They can participate whenever their schedule allows from their phone and of course hosts can disable audio and cameras to make sure that there are no disruptions. CIR negotiates with universities in other states that provide observers with remote access and they found that it has actually reduced the number of bargaining sessions needed to reach an agreement.

In California, CIR has been negotiating with the UC for almost a year and they're very motivated to reach an agreement as soon as possible. This bill is a simple way to recognize the sacrifices that medical residents work make to work.

They work twenty four hour shifts without sleep, and we should acknowledge that their schedules prevent them from being able to meaningfully engage. I respectfully request your aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have any me too's in support of this bill? Please come to the mic and state your name and affiliation.

Matt Broad for Teamsters California in support.

Mario Guerrero with the California Faculty Association in support. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam chair. Doug Subers on behalf of the California State University Employees Union in support.

Elmer Lizardi on behalf of the California Federation of Labor Unions in support.

Mitch Steiger with CFT, a union of educators and classified professionals, also in support.

Thank you. We will move to opposition. Are there any opposition witnesses? Please come to this table. Support witnesses, you may have a seat.

And you each have two minutes.

Good morning, chair and members. Eric Bakke on behalf of the California State University here in respectful opposition to this bill. Let me begin by saying we appreciate the conversations we've had with the bill's sponsors and their willingness to engage on on our concerns.

While the CSU supports the goal of transparency and access and collective bargaining, we believe this issue is best addressed through the collective bargaining process itself, consistent with HERO and the long standing PERB decisions.

AB 1630 was removed from the bargaining table, a subject that PERB has expressly determined must be negotiated between the parties. Current law already allows employers and unions to mutually agree on whether observers may attend bargaining sessions and under what conditions.

Additionally, we have concerns, that the bill introduces significant ambiguity by allowing one or more observers to attend at the exclusive representative's discretion without establishing any parameters around attendance. Those details matter. Questions regarding the number of observers, logistics, confidentiality, and the conduct of bargaining sessions are best resolved by the parties through negotiated ground rules.

Left undefined and subject to one party's discretion, the bill risks complicating bargaining sessions and undermining the candid dialogue that is often necessary to reach agreements. We believe the existing process provides the flexibility needed to address the differing needs of bargaining units while preserving, productive labor relations. For these reasons, we respectfully request a no vote on AB 1630.

Good afternoon, madam chair and committee members. Missy Matella, Associate Vice President for Systemwide Employee and Labor Relations at the University of California. The university similarly supports the goal of transparency in this bill, but we respectfully oppose AB 1630 because we believe in the productive two bargaining two party bargaining system that has worked well for the last several decades and that gives the parties the ability to define the rules that work well for their negotiations.

From a practical labor relations perspective, UCS successfully closed six contracts over the last nine months. We have been able to do that through productive and candid conversations between our bargaining teams.

These bargaining teams have been large enough to fully represent the university and the union's interests while also ensuring the parties maintain a focused environment for these important conversations between the union and the institutions. As per recognized in the Petaluma decision, bargaining depends on this type of atmosphere.

This bill would fundamentally shift away from this proven model to a legislatively mandated model that invites observers into the process without the consent or negotiation of the parties, and at which, at this point, seems more focused on the rights of the observers and the rights of the parties to the bill the parties to the negotiation. This is especially true given the bill's amendments that indicate that an observer is not a passive participant.

Implementing this bill would also create a significant logistical and technical burden. The universities would need to secure authenticated platforms capable of hosting thousands of potentially observers across our entire system. Many of our unions are more than 30,000 members, which would create significant problems.

We believe that maintaining the flexibility to determine observation protocols through the collective bargaining process best serves both all parties involved. It allows us to keep our negotiations efficient, collaborative, and tailored to the unique needs of the unit, a process that has worked well for the university for decades. Thank you.

We are going to go to opposition me too's. Are there any opposition me too's in the room? Please state your name and affiliation.

Hello. Sofia Quach on behalf of the Bay Area Council in respectful opposition.

Okay. That looks like we're concluding. Bring it to the dais members. Questions, comments?

I'm in support of the bill and happy to make a motion now that we have a quorum.

Wonderful. So we have a motion. Thank you. We'll do that and give our member an opportunity to close.

Thank you, Chair. Thanks to the sponsors of the bill, SEIU California and SEIU CIR specifically. I appreciate, the opposition for coming forward, sharing your opinion, but have to, you know, really disagree with the framing of this bill. We're essentially allowing for our medical residents and internists to get a Zoom link who are already part of the bargaining unit. And so this is, you know, should not be controversial.

We're trying to give them the flexibility that they need so that they can actually participate remotely and they are again already part of the bargaining unit. And so I hope that UC and the CSU, come on board in a good faith effort, since you have rejected all efforts to allow for this, remote participation currently and that's why this bill is before us today. And so, look forward to future conversations and I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you so much. And we will take this bill up. Oh, well, we can take it up. We have a quorum. We have a motion from Senator Cortese and assistant, please call the roll.

Motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Appropriations.

[roll call]

We have a vote vote of two to one. This bill is on call. Thank you. We are gonna move to the consent calendar. Can I get a motion? Thank you. Senator Strickland, assistant, please call the roll. On the

consent calendar, we have file consent calendar, we have file item four, AB 1245, file item nine, AB 1980, file item 14, AB 2417, and file item 18, AB 2780. [Roll Call]

We have a vote of three to zero on the consent calendar. It is on call. Looks like we are waiting for authors now.

Madam chair, do we want to to go back and pick up the non quorums that we had? I think there's several

Absolutely. So we're gonna make the request for motions. I know you did several earlier Yep. Senator Cortese. So we're gonna go file item number one, AB 1729. We have a motion from Senator Cortese. Please call the roll.

The motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Governmental Organization. [Roll Call]

Okay. We have a vote of two to one on that bill. It's on call. We will move to file item number two AB 72. Got a motion from Senator Cortese. Please call the roll.

The motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Appropriations. [Roll Call]

That bill has a vote of two to one, and it is on call. We will move on to file item number three, AB 805. Assembly member Fong. We got a motion from Senator Strickland. Please call the roll.

Motion is do passed as amended to the Senate Committee on Appropriations. [Roll Call]

Okay. That bill has a vote of three to zero. It is on call. Moving on to file item number five, AB 1576. Need a motion? We have a motion from Senator Cortese. Please call the roll.

Motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Appropriations. [Roll Call]

K. That bill has a vote of two two one. It is on call. We will move on to file item number six, AB 1582 Ortega. Need a motion? Thank you, Senator Cortese. Please call the roll.

The motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Judiciary. [Roll Call]

K. We have a vote of two to one and that bill is on call. We are gonna move on to file item number eight. But we did that. We just voted on that.

Okay. So we are, I think, done with our previous bills, and, we are waiting on Assemblymember Valencia. Oh, Assembly member Pellerin, right on time. Early. Wonderful.

So we are gonna move to file item number 16 and that's AB 2650. And any witness Please come and have a seat at the table.

Let's see who I have. Yes. Good to see you. Okay. I was hurrying and trying to block anyone else from coming out

the door. And you were successful. Begin when you're

ready. Good morning, madam chair and members. Retirement savings, while important for everyone to have, many do not plan for until it's too late. Planning for retirement today's economy has become increasingly more difficult to attain. As of 2020, over one fourth of non retired adults and two thirds of millennials do not have any form of retirement savings.

CalSavers was created by this body in 2016 to tackle California's retirement savings crisis. Since its launch in 2019, California has seen private employer plans grow by 15% with Cal savers adding more than 630,000 accounts to supplement that coverage. However, multiple problems are facing the CalSavers program, which have affected implementation and require updating. AB 2650, the Save for All Workers Act, makes several technical updates to modernize the law, bringing the program closer to sustainability and maintaining employer compliant compliance over time.

Furthermore, it allows CalSavers to assist participants in claiming government retirement benefits by cutting red tape, which can result in an increase of a $136,000,000 a year.

The bill also clarifies that domestic employees are included in the program, ensuring that they have access to the same retirement as their boss. With me to testify in support is CalSaver's executive director, David

Take hearts. Yep.

Take hearts. Yep. Thank you. Take heart. Wonderful.

Thank you so much. You have two minutes.

Thank you very much, madam chair, members of the committee, and assembly member. I'm David Takeharz. I'm the exec director for CalSavers. CalSavers is California's state run retirement savings program for workers whose employers do not offer a retirement plan like a four zero one k, which gives millions of Californians the opportunity to have a simple, portable, and low cost way to save for their retirement. Today, CalSavers is already operating at scale.

We have about 77,000 businesses that are actually running the program. We have now approached now 700,000 individual savers in the program, so it's growing and it's working right now. We have $2,000,000,000 in assets under management. The bill before you today is a technical but important cleanup bill that helps the program to operate just more efficiently and more effectively while clarifying details that were not really fully addressed in the original framework many years ago. Among the key elements are the following.

It would help ensure that the program can create the correct account types so that eligible participants can receive federal savers match funds smoothly and without unnecessary friction. That's the big one. Free money easily into the accounts from the Federal Government. It would raise the cap on annual contribution increases for participants from 8% to 10%, getting getting us in line with industry best practices and helping savers actually accumulate enough money to eventually retire.

It clarifies that penalties for continued employer noncompliance are indeed ongoing, not just a one time flap on the wrist.

And lastly, it confirms that household employers with basically, with wage paid wage paid workers in their homes are indeed covered and mandated consistent with the program's original intent. The bill also includes smaller technical fixes, including dates and administrative clarifications to make the program easier to administer and for folks to understand exactly what their obligations are. In short, the bill just strengthens CalSaver so that we can continue to close the retirement savings access gap for working Californians. Thank you.

Happy to take any questions or I'm trying to send my member.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any me too's in support of this bill, please come to the mic and state your name and affiliation.

Peter Hansel, here on behalf of AARP California in strong support.

Thank you. Okay. We will move to opposition. Is there an opposition witness or witnesses here? Seeing none, any opposition Me Too 's?

Seeing none, we will bring it to the members. Questions, comments? Okay. We have a motion from Senator Cortesi and I wanted to say thank you to the author for this bill and I wanna also thank treasurer Fiona Ma, for sponsoring this bill. In an ideal world, social security would cover it all but we don't live in that world and some of us don't have pensions.

Speaking as a member of the California State Legislature. And so these programs are yes. Incredibly important. We need to do better. CalSavers is a really good start.

It's already creating so many retirement accounts. I'm glad to hear the progress in terms of the assets. This bill smartly gives Cal Savers clear authority and guidance to set up the special IRAs for workers to capture federal savers match contributions, which is critically important. And I recognize the need for this built enhanced penalties to deal with those outlaw employers, those employers, who, don't do the right thing.

But I do have concerns, particularly about our economically and culturally vulnerable small employers who oftentimes don't get access to information, don't know how to do the right thing, and in some instances need technical assistance to be Un to Understand how they do that.

I'm supporting the bill today, of course, but I hope the author will work on this question about how do we inform those employers who have just one employee, to make sure that our, our, our, minority and, and very small businesses, those that, need culturally appropriate outreach in terms of language, in terms of one on one support, that they get it to be able to do the right thing and ensure that every worker, is able to participate in this program.

And so with that, we have a motion from Senator Cortesi, but I will invite you to close.

I respectfully ask for your aye vote.

Thank you. Assistant, please call the roll.

The motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Senator Small Capuvas?

Aye. Small

de Cuevas, aye. Senator Strickland. Senator Cortese? Cortese, aye. Strickland, no.

Strickland, no. Senator DeGrazo? Senator Laird?

We have a vote of two to one on that bill. It is on call. Thank you very much. Thank you. I see Assemblymember Gibson is in the house.

So we will move back up to file item number 12. If you have witnesses, they may have a seat at the front table. Begin when you're ready.

Thank you very much. Madam chair and members, thank you for allowing me to present Assembly Bill 2054. Assembly Bill 22,054 ensures equitable access to paid family leave for eligible relatives for military service members. In California, we recognize that when a service member is called to duty, their entire family is called to service alongside them. State law provides unemployment insurance benefits to military families to help them manage, real life impact and of, employment, deployment, excuse me.

Things like arranging childcare, handling financial, and legal matters, and preparing for long periods of separation from their families. This support exists because we understand that military, service creates sudden and significant, and disruptions at the homes. However, the current status, the current statue, does not reflect the full range of modern service military service. Today, service members may be deployed overseas, activated, here at home in response to natural disasters or emergencies or assigned to extensive training in preparation for future deployment.

Despite similar and sacrifice or disruptions, not all of these assignments are are treated equally under existing law.

At a result, as a result of families can face confusion, inconsistencies or or inabilities that

that they face within here at home or through their deployment. That means a service member's responding to a wildfire or a flood or other emergencies here in California may be protecting our communities while worrying about their families, here at home. Assembly bill 2054 addresses these gaps by updating and clarifying the definition of coverage active duties to reflect a reality of modern day military service here at home. Here with me to provide, testimony to assembly bill 20, 54 and provide technicals.

Any technical questions you may have, will be Veronica.

Please pronounce your last name. Well, please yes. For the yeah. It's United States, Navy personnel who will, be here to testify in support of Assembly Bill 2054. We're happy to have her here.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. You have two minutes.

Good morning, chair, senators. My name is Veronica Padillo. I'm here on representing Navy Region Southwest on behalf of the military services in California, as well as the Defense State Liaison Office who is a sponsor of this bill and unfortunately couldn't be here today. Our service members face unique challenges that go beyond foreign deployments. Today's military duty frequently includes domestic mobilizations and extended large scale training exercises right here in The United States.

Additionally, there are other circumstances or examples such as the COVID pandemic where several medical military personnel mobilized throughout the country in support of And they were there for several months. What was supposed to be a few weeks turned into a very long mobilization. During these periods of service, military spouses and family members often need to take time away from their work to handle qualifying exigencies. This includes sudden necessities like securing childcare or making critical legal and financial arrangements. AB 2,054 enhances the state's unemployment insurance program.

And as the assembly member mentioned, this critical update ensures the program reflects the actual realities of modern day military service and functions as originally intended. Readiness of our service members are directly linked to the stability of their families. We deeply appreciate California's significant efforts to support our service members and their communities. AB 2,054 is a common sense measure that straightens that commitment. We respectfully request your support, on this bill.

Thank you.

Thank you. And as the daughter of a Navy veteran, go Navy. Any Me Too's in support of this bill, please step to the mic and state your name and affiliation.

Ned McKinley with Marine Corps installations West in support.

Okay. We will move to opposition. Are there any opposition witnesses with us today? Seeing none, we will move to opposition me twos. Any opposition me twos?

Okay. To the dice, members?

Move the vote. Move

the vote. Okay. We have a motion from Senator Strickland. Would you like to close the Senate member?

Yes. I wanna, thank our witness, one, for her service to this country, and then also her testifying on behalf of the men and women who would benefit from, this measure.

We believe that those who not only protect us abroad, but also in case of a natural disaster, any kind of emergency here at home who are called to duty should be treated, equally, as they do, to, taken abroad, because their family, again, when they're called to duty, their family is also called to duty and should not suffer behind, even if they're deployed here at home.

We witnessed, the evening of the Palisades, a fire where we had military being deployed, and they should also be taken care of. And that's one of the reasons why this bill is so important, for those men and women.

But most of all, those families who also are are in fact being also being need to be taken care of based on this particular bill. We believe this is this measure is is needed. I mean, it speaks to the day and time that we're living in right now. Respectfully, it asks, for an aye vote. This is a common sense measure, and respectfully, it asks for a strong I vote.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, assembly member. And we have a motion from Senator Strickland. Let's call the roll.

The motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Military and Veteran Affairs. Senator Small Cuevas? Aye. Small Cuevas, aye. Senator Strickland?

Aye. Strickland, aye. Senator Cortese? Aye. Cortese, aye.

Senator Turazo? Senator Laird?

If you

have a vote of three to zero, the bill's on call. We'll take it up when the members return. Thank you, Assemblymember. Thank you.

have a vote of three to zero, the bill's on call. We'll take it up when the members return. Thank you, Assemblymember. Thank you.

Okay. We are looking for authors in the Senate Labor Public Employment and Retirement Committee. Come on down Room 2200. We're ready for you. That is assembly member Valencia, Berman, Connolly, Schiavo, Petrie Norris. Please join us Room 2200.

Okay. We have an author in our midst. Wonderful. We are gonna move to fa item number 13. That's AB 2157.

Assemblymember Conley, please join us. If you have a witness, they are welcome to have a seat at the table.

Thank you, chair and members. Good morning. Great to be here. Proud to present AB 2157, which will make the Displaced Oil and Gas Workers Fund pilot program, commonly known as DOG WOOF, permanent in California statute. Currently, DOG WOOF is the only state program of its kind that helps address the needs of displaced workers in the oil and gas sector by supporting them in training and transitioning into jobs that match their skills, expertise, and offer comparable wages.

As the global economy shifts away from oil and gas production, both extraction and refining, operational closures have displaced thousands of workers throughout the state. In 2020 and 2021, the Marathon refinery closure in Martinez and the Phillips sixty six refinery closure in Santa Maria displaced over 600 full time workers. In October 2024, the Phillips, 70 66 refinery in Carson announced its plan to close by the fourth quarter of twenty twenty five, with approximately 900 employees and contractors expected to lose their jobs.

Additionally, Valero refineries in both Benicia and Wilmington have announced their closures this year. It's important to recognize that displacement in the oil and gas sector is particularly difficult for workers.

Almost a third of employees are age 50 or older, and most have industry receiving their training on the job. Traditional retraining pathways, such as multi year apprenticeship programs in the industrial sector, may not be realistic or appropriate for these workers. Most importantly, it may also not be what workers want. This is why the dog wolf program is so important. It has created the opportunity for workers to engage in diverse pathways to new employment in multiple sectors of the economy.

Currently, the dog wolf program is set to expire on July 1, even though displaced workers will need support long after 2027. AB 2157 addresses this issue by eliminating the sunset date for the dog with program and making it permanent. AB, with me to testify in support of AB 2157 is Norman Rogers, second vice president, United Steelworkers Local six seventy five, and Nick, Plarkowski, president of United Steelworkers Local five.

Thank you. Assembly member, you both have two minutes.

Alright. Good morning, everybody. Nick Borkoski, president of United Steelworkers Local five, and I just wanted to give a little background on the displaced oil and gas worker fund. Like mentioned, when Marathon shut down in 2020, workers were caught off guard. I'm not sure what to do.

We actually have a study that was published by Doctor. Virginia Parks on fossil fuel layoff, and it shows the the very difficult options that people are put into and the loss of, you know, the the full wage. Most people still didn't find a job after a year. So very very difficult times there. And we represent the proprietary workers in these refineries.

So the skill is basically becoming a specialist on these trade secret units that run-in there. And so when a worker steps outside the gate, their their training, their certifications, and everything basically just don't exist. So, you know, historically, these have been careers. People spend decades specializing in the units that they run, and they they don't transfer from one refinery to another. Refinery would be to start over.

And for a lot of people, that's not a great option, especially now with more and more refinery closures. So this bill was kicked off to help and all the refineries that have been closing just goes to show you the need for this program. So we would like to it to continue and and get rid of the sunset so that we can finish what we started with this. And I'll pass it off to Norm.

Thank you. Good morning. Yeah. To follow-up with what Nick's been saying, the heavy work's actually already been done because AB 191 was passed in June 2022. So the vetting and all that's taken place, but that's when the sunset date came in, making this a pilot program.

But we knew then that it was problematic because in 2020, the doing away with internal combustion engines, no new internal combustion engines to be sold in the state of California by 2035, we're already starting to close the curtain. And, we know that contraction is gonna continue to take place with oil refining. So we were happy we got it. We knew it was not going to meet fully what we needed because the need is gonna be there beyond 2027.

We've had to we've received funds, and what we've done is create the California Oil Worker Readiness Program.

And that's through the USW for our folks. Ideally, it had been to be a preemptive before people lost their jobs. But when Phillips closed, it became more of an emergency. But that's to get folks into training and we have our folks working as navigators to guide folks through the program, to get them signed up, to get them into the program, to get them the classes they need. All that's taken time to get things where we need them to be.

Now with the sunset coming of next year, somebody that loses their job today, we're already through spring semester. We're almost too late for somebody to sign up in the summer semester. That just leaves fall and then come March, June of next year, July. That's the end of the program. But the the need goes well beyond that.

And even one of our navigators who's been helping other people, when her refinery closed, she's been helping other people, but now she doesn't have the time to actually take advantage of the program herself herself. But it's been working. We've had a gentleman that's moved into cyber security. And even though that's moved him into an entry level job, he has that base knowledge now to help him, matriculate more quickly with the company he's hired on to.

And there's other folks taking, drone classes, water treatment classes, crane operation folks are moving through.

You're two minutes is up.

Okay. So we just finished by please asking, asking for your eye vote.

Thank you. Thank you. Any me too's in support of this bill, please step forward and state your name and affiliation.

Clifton Wilson on behalf of the Kern County Board of Supervisors. Just wanna say thank you for the comments to the witness and thank you for

the bill to the author.

Bill Brier from Climate Action California. We recognize that health jobs are healthy and electric vehicles healthy, so this is part of the package. Thank you. We support.

Catherine V. R. Houston on behalf of United Steel Workers District twelve, The Climate Center, and California Labor for Climate Jobs in support.

Christina Mohaveer, California Environmental Voters in support. Thank you.

Janice O'Malley AFSCME California in support.

Jim Lindberg, Friends Committee on Legislation of California in support.

Thank you. Do we have any opposition witnesses with us? Okay. Any opposition me too, folks? Okay.

Seeing none, we'll come to the dais. And we have lost our member for, for a motion. I I wanna just, thank the author for bringing this this bill forward, and I really appreciate the testimony of the witnesses today. This is a very, difficult space to be in transitions. Right?

It's very difficult space to be in and the steel workers know very well how this transition works and to have an offensive plan, well, as well as a defensive plan, making sure that we can protect these jobs that workers have organized in in the oil and gas field to make them career union jobs, that we have to work together to figure out ways to, have a just transition, and protect the workers no matter what sector they're in.

And I really wanted to appreciate seeing the environmental community here. We wanna make sure that that coalition is in place, not just for, the, DOG WOOF, which I didn't know was the acronym, but a fund to retrain workers, but also to make sure that we do all that we can to maintain those careers, for as long as we can because we know our state is going to need a number of sources of energy to meet the needs of of our communities in the future.

So with that, I will give you the opportunity

Oh. I

was gonna do it.

Oh, you will do a courtesy motion. Okay. Wonderful. So we do have a courtesy motion from Senator Strickland, and I will give you the opportunity to close.

And thank you so much for that consideration. Respectfully ask for an I vote.

Wonderful. Thank you. We have a motion from Senator Strickland. Please call the roll.

The motion is do passed to the Senate Committee on Appropriations. Senator Small Cuevas?

Aye.

Small Cuevas, aye. Senator Strickland? No. Strickland, no. Senator Cortezi.

Senator Durazo. Senator Laird.

We have a vote of one to one on this bill. It's on call. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Berman.

Oh, I'm promoting I'm put I'm putting you in my house already. I'm sorry about that. Assembly member Berman, our good chair of assembly BNP, thank you for being here. We are gonna move to your file item number 10AB1838. Your witnesses can have a seat at the table and you please proceed when ready.

Thank you, chair Smallwood Cuevas and Senator Strickland. Vice chair Strickland? Vice chair Strickland? I wanna make sure that I get the honorifics appropriate. Is that a thing?

I think that's a word. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

It's perfect. AB 1838 would ensure that local agencies can better assess if contractors should be awarded a public works project bid. Existing law requires most public works construction contracts to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. Any history of wage and hour violations directly reflects contractor responsibility and is critical information for local agencies to determine who should be trusted with taxpayer dollars.

This bill would require a contractor submitting a bid for a public works construction project to disclose any history of wage and hour violations within the previous five years.

The bill was recently amended to ensure that contractors don't have to submit duplicative documents and that there is a notice and appeals process. AB 1838 would help ensure taxpayer dollars are well spent, promote fair labor practices, and increase transparency for local agencies awarding public contracts. And I respectfully ask for an aye vote, and I'm joined today by Keith Dunn with the District Council of Ironworkers.

Thank you. And you have two minutes.

Thank you, madam chair and mister vice chair. Keith Dunn here on behalf of the District Council of Ironworkers, as well as other cosponsors, operating engineers, as well as the state building construction trades council. As was stated under existing law, most public work construction contracts are required to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.

An existing law further defines that a responsible bidder a responsible bidder is a bidder who has demonstrated the attributes of trustworthiness as well as quality, fitness, capacity, and experience to satisfactorily perform that public work. While existing law is clear on what constitutes a responsible bidder, awarding agencies are often not privy to certain information that could be critical to determining if a contractor is securing taxpayer dollars for a public construction project is actually responsible.

One of the main tools that awarding bodies currently use to determine if a contractor is responsible is through verifying their license and public works registrations. These items can allow an awarding agency to determine whether a contractor has workers compensation insurance or has been debarred from bidding on public works. While this information is critical, awarding agencies are often not aware of a contractor's history and labor violations, which directly reflect whether a contractor could be considered responsible moving forward on new contracts.

Out of recognition of the hour, I'm gonna cut short the rest of my testimony and just say I'm here to answer any questions. We think this is a good responsible bill, and we'd ask for your support.

Thank you very much. Are there me too folks out there in support of the bill? Please come to the mic and state your name and affiliation.

Thank you, madam chair. Sandra Barreiro on behalf of SEIU California in support.

Jessica Hait with AFSCME California in support.

Madam chair and members, Martin Vindiol on behalf of the California State Association of Electrical Workers, the California State Bike Trades Council, and the Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers in support. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. We will move to opposition. Is there an opposition witness? Please have a seat at the table.

Mister Fuentes, you have two minutes.