Issue 121 – March 2022
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Legislative Update
Although we are in the earlier stages of the 2022 state legislative calendar, there are already bills worth watching that may affect members. As bills are subject to major amendments and changes as they go through the legislature, each of the bills below has been assigned a “watch” status. The Authority will provide a more definitive position for each bill in future articles as the details and text for each becomes finalized.
AB 334 (Mullin). Workers’ compensation: skin cancer.
Summary:
This bill seeks to extend presumptions of skin cancer during employment to select peace officers within the Department of Fish and Wildlife, as well as the Department of Parks and Recreation. This presumption currently includes only active lifeguards. The potential concern with this bill is that although this bill specifically references certain positions within California state departments (i.e., the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Department of Parks and Recreation), it could set a precedent that results in covering positions or conditions that might not be suitable.
AB 988 (Bauer-Kahan). Mental health: 988 crisis hotline.
Summary:
This bill seeks to require 988 centers by July 16, 2022, although that date is projected to get pushed back since this bill has not been revisited since it was last discussed in June 2021. The purpose of a 988 center is to provide a hotline for an individual going through a mental health crisis with a trained counselor who can appropriately respond with the needed help. The bill specifically states that these 988 centers would provide help in the form of “immediate suicidal or behavioral health crisis intervention in a timely manner.” There are additional provisions and milestones that are built into the bill and which aim to provide a more systematic plan for supporting people who need mental health assistance. The Authority supports this bill in the form it was reviewed last year.
AB 1017 (Quirk-Silva). Public restrooms: Right to Restrooms Act of 2021.
Summary:
This bill seeks to require local government agencies to conduct an inventory of their public restrooms. That information would be reported to the California Department of Public Health. That inventory would then need to made available to organizations that work with homeless populations, as well as the local government agency’s website. Although the bill has good intentions in serving the homeless populations, the Authority holds a tentative opposed position until the bill’s details are further clarified.
AB 1041 (Wicks). Employment: leave.
Summary:
This bill seeks to expand the California Family Rights Act to include a “designated person” as a covered individual under the Act. The bill defines a “designated person” to mean “a person identified by the employee at the time the employee requests family care and medical leave.” Although the bill’s amendments include a provision for an employer to “limit an employee to one designated person per 12-month period,” the interpretation of a “designated person” is very broad and left at the discretion of an employee. This is a noticeable contrast to the California Family Rights Act’s other qualified individuals which have more clearly defined status (e.g., child, parents, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, etc.). The Authority holds a tentative opposed position until the bill’s details are clarified.
AB 2188 (Quirk). Discrimination in employment: use of cannabis.
Summary:
This bill seeks to amend the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, and in turn, “make it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against a person” based on an individual’s cannabis use outside of employment and “away from the workplace.” This bill makes a distinction between tetrahydrocannabinol (more commonly known as “THC”) and its “nonpsychoactive” form. The bill is relatively new (it was read for the first time in February of this year), so the Authority holds a tentative “watch” position until further developments emerge.
SB 284 (Stern). Workers’ compensation: firefighters and peace officers: post-traumatic stress.
Summary:
This bill seeks to expand the post-traumatic stress presumption under existing law to make it apply to “active firefighting members” of various state departments (e.g., State Department of State Hospitals, State Department of Developmental Services, Department of Veterans Affairs, etc.) and to “public safety dispatchers, public safety telecommunicators, and emergency response communication employees.” The bill has not been acted upon since August 2021, but the Authority holds a tentative opposed position due to the potential implications by expanding the PTSD presumption. Although well-meaning, expanding presumptions without clear definition and intent can have the potential to present extremely difficult changes to employers.
SB 335 (Cortese). Workers’ compensation: liability.
Summary:
This bill seeks to reduce the time for employers to rebut liability for employee injuries from 90 days to 45 days. “Certain injuries or illnesses, including hernia, heart trouble, pneumonia, or tuberculosis, among others, sustained in the course of employment” would reduce the time to 30 days. The potential concern with this bill is that it gives employers a significantly less amount of time to conduct their own investigation and verification of injuries and illnesses that occur during the course of employment. When this bill was last reviewed in 2021, the Authority felt that a tentative opposed position was appropriate given the time and resource strain this could potentially have on local government agencies (and, employers in general).
SB 1127 (Atkins). Workers’ compensation: liability presumptions.
Summary:
This bill has similarities to SB 335 (Cortese) in that it revolves around the topic of reducing an employer’s time to rebut an injury presumption. In fact, SB 1127 could potentially be seen as a refresh of SB 335, since SB 1127 was newly introduced in February of this year (whereas SB 335 has not been revived and touched since last year). This bill seeks to reduce the employer’s time to rebut an injury presumption from 90 days to 60 days. “Certain injuries or illnesses, including hernia, heart trouble, pneumonia, or tuberculosis, among others, sustained in the course of employment” would reduce the time to 30 days. As with SB 335 the potential concern with this bill is the significant reduction in time for employers to conduct their own investigation and verification of potential employment-related injuries and illnesses. Given the potential time, resource, and administrative strain on local government agencies, the Authority holds a tentative opposed position on this bill.
The Authority will continue to monitor the above bills, as well as other bills that may affect members from a risk management perspective.
< Back to Full Issue Print Article