Stay Up to Date

CalChamber Stops Two More ‘Job Killers’ on Assembly Floor

​(June 5, 2015) As the California State Legislature concluded its business June 4, two “job killers” failed to move off the Assembly Floor. The California Chamber of Commerce has identified 19 “job killer” bills to date. As of today, the deadline for bills to pass the house in which they were introduced, seven Senate “job killer” bills and three Assembly “job killer” bills remain active.

Two of the Senate bills and one Assembly bill still alive are tax measures and not subject to the house of origin deadline.

Failed to Pass Assembly

The following “job killer” bills failed to pass the Assembly by the house of origin deadline and are likely dead for the year:

  • ​AB 356(Williams; D-Santa Barbara) Limits In-State Energy Development — Potentially shuts down certain in-state oil production operations by redefining critical components of the Underground Injection Control program which would, in turn, compromise oil production without providing any additional environmental and groundwater protections beyond those recently proposed by state regulators. Assembly Floor; Failed deadline, 6/4/15.​
  • AB 357(Chiu; D-San Francisco) Predictable Scheduling Mandate/Protected Leave of Absence — Imposes an unfair, one-size-fits-all, two-week notice scheduling mandate on certain retail and food employers that penalizes these employers with “additional pay” for making changes to the schedule with less than two weeks notice, and additionally imposes a new, protected leave of absence from work for employees who are seeking public assistance. Assembly Floor Inactive File, 6/4/15. 

‘Job Killers’ Still Moving

The bills below have moved into their second house and will be set for policy committee hearings in the upcoming weeks.

Increased Labor Costs

SB 3 (Leno; D-San Francisco/ Leyva; D-Chino) Automatic Minimum Wage Increase — Unfairly increases employers’ costs while ignoring the economic factors or other costs of employers by increasing the minimum wage by $3.00 over the next two and a half years with automatic increases tied to inflation.

SB 406 (Jackson; D–Santa Barbara) Significant Expansion of California Family Rights Act — Creates less conformity with federal law by dramatically reducing the employee threshold from 50 to at least 25 employees and expanding the family members for whom leave may be taken, which will provide a California-only, separate 12-week protected leave of absence for both small and large employers to administer, thereby increasing costs and risk of litigation.

Increased Fuel Costs

SB 350 (de León; D-Los Angeles) Costly and Burdensome Regulations — Potentially increases costs and burdens on all Californians by mandating an arbitrary and unrealistic reduction of petroleum use by 50%, increasing the current Renewable Portfolio Standard to 50% and increasing energy efficiency in buildings by 50% — all by 2030 without regard to the impact on individuals, jobs and the economy.

Increased Burdensome Environmental Regulation

SB 32 (Pavley; D-Agoura Hills) Slows Economic Growth — Increases costs for California businesses, makes them less competitive and discourages economic growth by adopting further greenhouse gas emission reductions for 2030 and 2050 without regard to the impact on individuals, jobs and the economy.

SB 654 (de León; D-Los Angeles) Creates Unworkable Hazardous Waste Permitting Process —  Discourages investment in upgrading and improving hazardous waste facilities by shutting down hazardous waste facilities if the Department of Toxic Substances Control fails to take final action on the permit renewal application within a specified timeframe, even if the permit applicant acted diligently and in good faith throughout the permit application process.

Economic Development Barriers

AB 359 (Gonzalez; D-San Diego) Costly Employee Retention Mandate — Inappropriately alters the employment relationship and increases frivolous litigation by allowing a private right of action and by requiring any successor grocery employer to retain employees of the former grocery employer for 90 days and continue to offer continued employment unless the employees’ performance during the 90-day period was unsatisfactory.

Increased Unnecessary Litigation Costs

AB 465 (Hernández; D-West Covina) Increased Litigation —  Significantly drives up litigation costs for all California employers as well as increases pressure on the already-overburdened judicial system by precluding mandatory employment arbitration agreements, which is likely pre-empted by the Federal Arbitration Act. Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee hearing June 10.

Twitter

Latest Video

See more »

Latest News

Brown Paddles His Canoe on Left, Then Right

Brown also rejected one of the year’s highest profile measures, which would have prohibited employers from requiring arbitration agreements and thus made it easier for workers to sue their bosses….

Back To Top