What they would have done: The vetoed “Farmworker Safety Bills” (SB 2346, AB 2676) and the “Domestic Workers Bill of Rights” (AB 889)

SB 2346 would have allowed farm workers to enforce the state's heat regulations personally by giving them the ability to sue employers who failed more than two times to comply with mandatory shade and drinking water requirements.  AB 2676 would have made it a criminal misdemeanor, punishable by jail and fines of up to $200,000, if appropriate water or shade were not provided to farm workers.  Under the vetoed legislation, employers might also have been liable for up to $1 million to a harmed worker's family in restitution.  These bills would have provided enforcement mechanisms for laws already on the books.

The Domestic Workers Bill of Rights called for protections similar to those that workers in other industries have enjoyed for years.  These basic protections would have included overtime pay and meal and rest breaks, as well as appropriate sleep accommodations for live-in workers and the use of employers' kitchens. The bill had exemptions in it for workers caring for the developmentally disabled and also for baby-sitters under age 18.

In 2011, President Obama proposed giving home aides additional labor protections such as overtime pay.  The Labor Department took comments on the proposal, which is now under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Household and agricultural workers were carved out of the 1935 National Labor Relations Act that established basic labor protections so the legislation would win support from Southern lawmakers.  Underlying discriminatory tensions remain.  According to one study, only 20% of domestic workers in California are white, while almost 70% are Latina, and 93% are women.

According to a study of domestic workers in Northern California by Mujeres Unidas y Activas, over 90% did not receive overtime pay and 11% took home less than the minimum wage.

Gov. Brown stated he vetoed AB 889 because of persisting “unanswered questions;” yet, built into the vetoed bill was a provision stating that the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) would study the economic impacts of the situation, and that, while DIR could decide to apply Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order 15—without modification—to domestic workers, it was not automatically required to do so.  Ironically, the Domestic Workers Bill as presented to Brown had already been watered down in an effort to attain compromise.

For now, domestic workers over 18 caring for those who are not developmentally disabled can’t count on time and one-half for hours worked after 8 in a day, nor a chance to rest and eat for 30 minutes after 5 hours worked.


Previous
Previous

A Mixed Bag: Governor Brown Vetoes Pro-Worker Legislation, but Signs Other Pro-Worker Bills

Next
Next

San Francisco Nursing Home Workers Collecting $500k in Back Pay