AB 2182 Wicks D
Expansion of Duty to Accommodate Employees and Litigation Under FEHA. Imposes new burdens on employers to accommodate any employee with family responsibilities, which will essentially include a new, uncapped protected leave for employees to request time off and exposes employers to costly litigation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act by asserting that any adverse employment action was in relation to the employee’s family responsibilities, rather than a violation of employment policies.
Status: 5/27/2022-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(b)(11). (Last location was A. APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 5/11/2022)
AB 2183 Stone D
Forced Unionization Process for Agricultural Employees. Limits an employee’s ability to independently and privately vote for unionization in the workplace, by essentially eliminating a secret ballot election and replacing it with the submission of representation cards signed by over 50% of the employees, which leaves employees susceptible to coercion and manipulation by labor organizations. Also, unfairly limits an employer’s ability to challenge the cards submitted by forcing employers to post an unreasonable bond, and then limits an employee’s ability to decertify a union, by forcing them to go through the ballot election process instead of submission of representation cards. Also includes an unnecessary presumption of retaliation that is effectively unlimited in scope because it would apply for the duration of an election campaign, which could last for a year or more.
Status: 6/1/2022-Referred to Coms. on L., P.E. & R. and JUD.
AB 2188 Quirk D
Limits Employers Ability to Keep Workplace Drug-Free. Risks workplace safety by promoting marijuana use to a protected class under California’s discrimination law, on par with national origin or religion. Also effectively prohibits pre-employment drug testing, harming employers’ ability to keep their workplace safe and drug free. In addition, would prohibit use of traditional marijuana tests, such as urine and hair testing, and compel employers to utilize saliva-based testing.
Status: 5/27/2022-In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
AB 2766 Maienschein D
Additional Investigatory Powers for District Attorneys. Would grant investigatory powers under California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) to local district attorneys, whereas now, such powers are reserved for the attorney general. The UCL is an incredibly powerful statute, allowing for pre-investigatory subpoenas and considerable penalties – which should be reserved to the discretion of the Attorney General’s office, not individual cities.
Status: 6/1/2022-Referred to Com. on JUD.
SB 1149 Leyva D
Disclosure of Trade Secrets, Increased Litigation, and outlawing settlement practices. Re-writes long-standing use of protective orders in lawsuits, as well as outlawing non-disclosure agreements as part of settlements based on vague terminology. Will force companies to settle early so as to avoid public release of broad documents south in discovery, as well as overwhelm California courts with unprecedented discovery fights as companies seek to protect their trade secrets.
Status: 6/2/2022-From committee with author’s amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
SB 1162 Limón D
Publication of Pay Data. Encourages litigation against employers based on the publication of broad, unreliable data collected by the state. Undermines employers’ ability to hire, imposes burdensome administrative and record keeping requirements, and subjects employers to a private right of action and penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA).
Status: 5/27/2022-Referred to Coms. on L. & E. and JUD.
SB 1172 Pan D
Adds Private Right of Action Under CPRA For Proctoring Services. Undermines the California Privacy Rights Act’s (CPRA) limited private right of action for data breaches by adding new legal liability under the CPRA for businesses who provide proctoring services in an education setting if they collect, retain, use, or disclose PI except to the extent necessary to provide those proctoring services. A consumer can bring an action for a violation of this section for (1) the greater of actual damages or liquidated damages of $1,000 per consumer per incident; (2) injunctive or declaratory relief; and (3) reasonable attorney fees and costs, including expert witness fees.
Status: 6/2/2022-Referred to Coms. on P. & C.P. and JUD.
SB 1189 Wieckowski D
New Private Right of Action for Biometric Information. Creates legal liability for businesses large and small, potentially in the millions to tens of millions of dollars, while not providing any exceptions, such as for the use of biometric data for safety, security, or other reasonable purposes. Also imposes new, untenable restrictions on the use and disclosure of biometric information in a thinly veiled attempt to undermine the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) limited private right of action for data breaches.
Status: 5/27/2022-Failed Deadline pursuant to Rule 61(b)(11). (Last location was S. APPR. SUSPENSE FILE on 4/25/2022)