Existing law authorizes the State Fire Marshal to make changes as may be necessary to standardize all existing fire protective equipment throughout the state. This bill would require, until January 1, 2031, the State Fire Marshal, in consultation with the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, to develop a working group with specified membership to make recommendations regarding personal protective equipment used in responding to lithium-ion battery fires. The bill would require, at a minimum, the working group to review, and for the purpose of making the recommendations to consider, the latest personal protective equipment to limit exposure to lithium and other heavy metals, technology to clean personal protective equipment, whether different types of personal protective equipment should be used for different types of lithium-ion battery fires, and current decontamination practices at the fire scene, as specified. The bill would require the recommendations to be submitted to the Legislature on or before September 1, 2026.
The California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 provides the Division of Occupational Safety and Health within the Department of Industrial Relations with the power, jurisdiction, and supervision over all employment and places of employment necessary to enforce and administer all occupational health and safety laws and to protect employees. The act grants to the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, an independent entity within the department, exclusive authority to adopt occupational safety and health standards within the state. Beginning July 1, 2018, and every 5 years thereafter, the act requires the board, in consultation with the department, to complete a comprehensive review of all revisions to National Fire Protection Association standards pertaining to certain personal protective equipment (PPE) and requires the board to consider modifying existing safety orders and to render a decision regarding the adoption of necessary changes to safety orders, or other applicable standards and regulations, no later than July 1 of the subsequent year, if the review finds that the revisions to applicable National Fire Protection Association standards provide a greater degree of personal protection than the safety orders. This bill would, in addition to the above-described requirement, require the board to consider modifying its existing safety order regarding firefighter personal protective equipment by January 1, 2028, to address National Fire Protection Association performance standards for PPE that are not relevant or applicable to how firefighters utilize their PPE and that result in the use of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, fluoropolymers, flame retardants, and other hazardous substances in firefighting personal protective garments and auxiliary firefighting PPE, as provided. The bill would also require, by July 1, 2026, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health to report on progress toward implementation of the modified PPE safety standards, as provided. The bill would also make related findings and declarations.
Existing law, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) , establishes the Civil Rights Department to enforce civil rights laws with respect to housing and employment and to protect and safeguard the right of all persons to obtain and hold employment without discrimination based upon specified characteristics or status. The FEHA makes certain discriminatory employment and housing practices unlawful, and authorizes a person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged unlawful practice to file a verified complaint with the department. The FEHA requires the department to make an investigation in connection with a filed complaint alleging facts sufficient to constitute a violation of the FEHA, and requires the department to endeavor to eliminate the unlawful practice by conference, conciliation, and persuasion. Existing law authorizes a complaint to be filed by an aggrieved person or the department on behalf and as representative of a group or class if the alleged unlawful practice adversely affects, in a similar manner, a group or class of persons of which the aggrieved person is a member. This bill would define the term "group or class complaint" for purposes of the FEHA. Existing law tolls the time for a complainant to file a civil action alleging a violation of specified civil rights provisions commencing with the filing of a complaint with the department until the department files a civil action for the alleged violation or until one year after the department issues written notice that it has closed its investigation without filing a civil action. This bill would additionally toll the time for a complainant to file a civil action if the complainant timely appeals to the department the closure of their complaint until one year after the department issues written notice that it remains closed following the appeal. Existing law authorizes the director to bring a civil action in the name of the department, acting in the public interest, on behalf of an aggrieved person if conference, conciliation, mediation, or persuasion fails to eliminate an unlawful practice. Existing law imposes a deadline of one or 2 years for the department to bring a civil action, as specified. Existing law requires those deadlines to be tolled during a dispute resolution proceeding. This bill would additionally require those deadlines to be tolled pursuant to a written agreement by the complainant and the department, during the pendency of a petition to compel, and for the duration of an appeal to the department for the closure of a complaint. Under existing law, if the department does not file a civil action, the department is required to promptly issue the person claiming to be aggrieved a right-to-sue notice upon request, as specified, or upon completion of its investigation and not later than one year after the filing of the complaint. For a complaint treated as a group or class complaint, existing law requires the department to issue a right-to-sue notice upon completion of its investigation and not later than 2 years after the filing of the complaint. Existing law requires these deadlines to be tolled during a dispute resolution proceeding. Under this bill, if the department determines that an aggrieved person's complaint relates to a complaint filed in the name of the director or a group or class complaint, as specified, the department would be required to issue a right-to-sue notice after the director's or group or class complaint has been fully and finally disposed of and all administrative proceedings, civil actions, appeals, or related proceedings have terminated. The bill would require this deadline and the above-described deadlines relating to issuing a right-to-sue notice to additionally be tolled pursuant to a written agreement by the complainant and the department, during the pendency of a petition to compel, and for the duration of an appeal to the department for the closure of a complaint. Existing law authorizes the department, in the case of failure to eliminate specified violations relating to housing discrimination that have occurred, or that are about to occur, as specified, to bring a civil action in the name of the department. Existing law authorizes the action to be filed in any county where the unlawful practice is alleged to have been committed, the records relevant to that practice are maintained and administered, the aggrieved party would have resided, or the defendant's residence or principal office is located, as specified. This bill would remove the above-described provisions specifying the counties where the civil action may be filed.
The existing Trial Court Interpreter Employment and Labor Relations Act divides trial courts into 4 specified regions and establishes regional court interpreter employment relations committees for those regions. Existing law requires each committee to set terms and conditions of employment for court interpreters within the respective region, as specified. Existing law requires that compensation be uniform throughout the region. Existing law, with exceptions, requires that other terms and conditions of employment be uniform throughout the region, but authorizes health and welfare and pension benefits to be the same as those provided to other employees of the same trial court. Existing law authorizes trial courts to set additional local compensation subject to specified conditions. This bill would authorize a recognized employee organization to request a multiregional bargaining if more than one region is bargaining in a calendar year, subject to the mutual consent of the recognized employee organization and the regional court interpreter employment relations committee.
Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, under the administration of the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in this state. Existing law establishes the Strong Workforce Program to provide funding to career technical education regional consortia made up of community college districts and local educational agencies, as specified. Existing law requires the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges to, no later than June 30, 2017, bring before the board of governors any policies, regulations, and guidance necessary to accomplish, among other things, providing work-based learning opportunities for students that increase their employability and earning potential, as provided. Existing law requires a percentage of the funds apportioned for community colleges under the program to be apportioned directly to community college districts in the consortia to fund, among other things, student grants to cover fees for third-party certification and licensing. This bill would require the chancellor's office to revise, no later than June 30, 2026, the above-described policies, regulations, and guidance necessary to provide students, employers, or both, with paid work-based learning opportunities, as provided. The bill would authorize a community college district to also use those funds apportioned directly to community college districts to provide direct support to students, employers, or both, for paid work-based learning to increase employability and employment, as provided.
Existing law requires a 3-part test, commonly known as the "ABC" test, to determine if workers are employees or independent contractors for purposes of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission. Under the ABC test, a person providing labor or services for remuneration is considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business. Existing law charges the Labor Commissioner with the enforcement of labor laws, including worker classification. Existing law exempts specified occupations and business relationships from the application of the ABC test described above. Existing law, instead, provides that these exempt relationships are governed by the multifactor test previously adopted in the case of S. G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Department of Industrial Relations (1989) 48 Cal.3d 341. Existing law includes an exemption for services provided by a licensed manicurist, subject to the manicurist meeting specified conditions, and makes this exemption for licensed manicurists inoperative on January 1, 2025. This bill would delete the January 1, 2025, inoperative date, and, instead, until January 1, 2029, reapply the above-specified exemption to certain licensed manicurists. The bill would also require the Employment Development Department and the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement to, by June 1, 2026, report to the Legislature the annual number of allegations of misclassification or other specified violations involving licensed manicurists since January 1, 2020, as specified. Existing law also provides an exemption for a commercial fisher working on an American vessel, as defined. Existing law makes those commercial fishers eligible for unemployment insurance benefits subject to certain conditions, and requires the Employment Development Department to issue an annual report, on March 1, to the Legislature on the use of unemployment insurance in the commercial fishing industry, as provided. Existing law makes these various provisions related to commercial fishers working on an American vessel inoperative on January 1, 2026. This bill would extend the inoperative date to January 1, 2031, and, thereby, until January 1, 2031, reapply the above-specified exemption to those commercial fishers, as prescribed. The bill would change the above-described annual reporting date from March 1 to June 30.
Existing law declares the public policy of the state regarding labor organization, including, among other things, that it is necessary for a worker to have full freedom of association, self-organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, to negotiate the terms and conditions of their employment, and to be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion of employers of labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives or in self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. Existing law, the Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act, added by Proposition 22, as approved by the voters at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election (the initiative) , categorizes app-based drivers for network companies, as defined, as independent contractors if certain conditions are met. Existing law requires, among other things, that the network company provide a health care subsidy to qualifying app-based drivers, provide a minimum level of compensation for app-based drivers, and not restrict app-based drivers from working in any other lawful occupation or business. Existing case law holds that specified provisions of the initiative are invalid on separation of powers grounds; however, the court severed the unconstitutional provisions, allowing the rest of the initiative to remain in effect. Existing law also establishes the Public Employment Relations Board (board) in state government as a means of resolving disputes and enforcing the statutory duties and rights of specified public employers and employees under various acts regulating collective bargaining. Existing law vests the board with jurisdiction to enforce certain provisions over charges of unfair practices for represented employees. This bill, the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act (act) , would establish that transportation network company (TNC) drivers have the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of TNC driver organizations, to bargain through representatives of their own choosing, to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and to refrain from such activities. The bill would require the board to enforce these provisions. This bill would require all TNCs to submit certain information every quarter, including information identifying and related personal work information about TNC drivers to the board in a list format, as prescribed. The bill would establish various procedures governing the certification and decertification of TNC driver organizations for purposes of representing drivers in the collective bargaining process. In this connection, the bill would require the board to determine if an entity is a TNC driver organization, as prescribed, and make certain determinations as to whether a specific organization has been designated as the bargaining representative for TNC drivers pursuant to an election process. The bill would establish various notice requirements, conditions, and timelines governing the representation of TNC drivers. The bill would, among other things, require TNCs and certified driver bargaining organizations to negotiate in good faith pursuant to the act, as described, and would set forth procedures for mediation and arbitration for purposes of reaching a sectoral agreement. The bill would set forth procedures and guidelines for the board to approve or disapprove sectoral agreements. The bill would require a TNC that was not a covered TNC when a sectoral agreement took effect but subsequently became a covered TNC to be bound by all terms of the sectoral agreement, as specified. This bill would make it an unfair practice for a TNC, an agent of a TNC, or a multicompany committee, as defined, to fail or refuse to negotiate in good faith with a certified driver bargaining organization, among other things. The bill would also make it an unfair practice for a certified driver bargaining organization or its agents to fail to negotiate in good faith with a TNC or multicompany committee, among other things. The bill would set forth unfair practice charge procedures and remedies for those practices. The bill would define terms for purposes of the act, make the provisions of the act severable, and make related legislative policy statements. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, generally requires all meetings of a state body to be open and public. This bill would exempt any meeting of a mediator or arbitrator with any party or group to the negotiations process and the mediation and arbitration processes in the act from the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting act. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, unless an exemption from disclosure applies. This bill would exclude from public disclosure information regarding TNC drivers that is submitted to the board pursuant to the act, except as specified. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Existing law establishes a workers' compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries arising out of and in the course of their employment. Existing law establishes procedures for the resolution of disputes regarding the compensability of an injury, including the use of a qualified medical evaluator (QME) to perform a comprehensive medical-legal evaluation to address all contested medical issues arising from all injuries reported in a claim. Existing law requires all communications with a panel QME before a medical evaluation to be in writing served on the opposing party 20 days in advance of the evaluation, and any subsequent communication with the QME to be in writing and served on the opposing party when the communication is sent to the QME. This bill would require the administrative director to develop and make available a medical evaluation request form for communicating with a panel qualified medical evaluator in advance of an evaluation obtained pursuant to the above provisions. The bill would require the administrative director to develop and make available a template QME report form, which will include all necessary statutory and regulatory requirements for a QME report. The bill would require the Division of Workers' Compensation to adopt regulations to implement these provisions by January 1, 2027.
Existing law designates various persons as peace officers, including officers of a state hospital under the jurisdiction of the State Department of State Hospitals or the State Department of Developmental Services. Existing law establishes a workers' compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers' Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries sustained in the course of their employment. Existing law creates a disputable presumption, applicable to officers and employees in the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, that heart trouble that develops or manifests during a period when the employee is in the service of the department arose out of and in the course of employment. This bill would add to the above-described presumption a peace officer, as defined, employed by the State Department of State Hospitals and would make other conforming and technical changes.
Existing law, until December 31, 2025, requires an employer, as defined, to offer its laid-off employees specified information about job positions that become available for which the laid-off employees are qualified, and to offer positions to those laid-off employees based on a preference system, in accordance with specified timelines and procedures. Existing law, until December 31, 2025, also prohibits an employer from refusing to employ, terminating, reducing compensation, or taking other adverse action against a laid-off employee for seeking to enforce their rights under these provisions. These provisions are enforced by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, as prescribed. Existing law defines "laid-off employee" for these purposes to mean an employee who was employed by the employer for 6 months or more and whose most recent separation from active employment by the employer occurred on or after March 4, 2020, and was due to a reason related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including a public health directive or reduction in force, among other reasons. Existing law also creates a presumption that a separation due to a lack of business, reduction in force, or other economic, nondisciplinary reason is due to a reason related to the COVID-19 pandemic, unless the employer establishes otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence. This bill would extend operation of these provisions until January 1, 2027, except as specified.
