Farm worker OT bill awaits verdict from Gov. Brown

Good morning. Happy Tuesday. But more importantly, happy second-to-last day of the legislative session.

A big ticket item was crossed off the list Monday when a bill expanding overtime pay for farm workers passed the Assembly. It now heads to the governor for a final verdict.

The bill would, over the course of a few years, bring the overtime structure for farm workers in line with that of many other professions by giving overtime past eight hours in a day, where currently the threshold is at 10 hours, and over 40 hours in a week, where it’s currently at 60 hours.

Some members opposed on procedural grounds. Assembly rules prohibit a measure from being reintroduced if it had already been defeated during that legislative session — the same measure was defeated in the Assembly earlier this year.

CalWatchdog has more.

In other news:

• “An Aug. 17 California appeals court ruling rejected a public employee union’s claim that its members had a right to “pension spiking,” which the court described as “various stratagems and ploys to inflate their income and retirement benefits.” Public employees often will pad their final salary total with vacation leave, bonuses and “special pay” categories to inflate the pension benefits they receive for the rest of their lives,” reports CalWatchdog.
• “State lawmakers passed a bill Monday to add mandatory prison sentences for certain sexual assaults – a measure inspired by a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge’s decision not to sentence a Stanford University student to prison in a high-profile case this year,” writes the Los Angeles Times.
• “California lawmakers’ response to the controversial series of videos that purported to show Planned Parenthood breaking the law has alienated some liberal allies of the organization, which is now negotiating changes to save its bill in the final days of the session,” writes The Sacramento Bee.
• “The state’s plan to build an initial stretch of high-speed rail line, from San Jose to a map point in the midst of Central Valley farmland, came under renewed attack at an oversight hearing Monday,” reports the Los Angeles Times.

• Who will Gov. Jerry Brown believe: the Mothers Against Drunk Driving or his own Department of Motor Vehicles? Brown will have to choose when deciding whether to sign Senate Bill 1046, a measure that would require drivers convicted of DUI to purchase and install “ignition interlock” devices in their vehicles. CalWatchdog has more.

Assembly:

• In at 10 a.m.

Senate:

• In at 2 p.m.

Gov. Brown:

• No public events announced for today. Will attend 20th Annual Lake Tahoe Summit on Wednesday.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New followers: @elmayedda

Who will Gov. Jerry Brown believe: the Mothers Against Drunk Driving or his own Department of Motor Vehicles?

That’s what it boils down to when Brown decides whether to sign Senate Bill 1046, a bill by Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, that’s touted as a crucial tool in keeping drunken drivers off California’s roads and highways.

The measure would require drivers convicted of DUI to purchase and install “ignition interlock” devices in their vehicles. The devices include a breathalyzer. If an unacceptable level of alcohol is detected on a driver’s breath, his or her vehicle’s engine is disabled. First-time offenders would have to install the devices for six months, with longer mandates for subsequent DUI convictions.

Hill and MADD say similar laws in 28 other states have a long track record of deterring drunken driving and reducing recidivism. While lawmakers balked in previous sessions at such a measure, this time opposition evaporated. The bill passed the Assembly 79-0  and the Senate 39-0.

The unanimous votes came despite DMV concerns. In a June report, agency officials said a test program in four counties — Los Angeles, Sacramento, Alameda and Tulare — with about a third of the state’s population arguably deterred new DUI cases but led to a significant increase in accidents among drivers whose vehicles were equipped with ignition interlocks. The increase was determined by comparing the accident rates among drivers with the devices and drivers with suspended licenses who drove illegally.

Bill would end automatic license suspension for DUI

Hill blasted the report to a home-district newspaper as being based on shoddy statistical analysis. But the DMV questioned Hill’s reasoning in turn, saying it was not clear that his bill — which ends automatic suspensions of driving rights for some first-time DUI offenders — was the best way to deal with the issue. The agency asserted that such automatic suspensions, which began in 1990, correlated strongly with a long-term drop in DUI recidivism.

A smarter approach, the DMV said, was to “convene a task force including representatives from the Legislature, judiciary, law enforcement, and other public agencies to develop recommendations for strengthening components of California’s comprehensive DUI countermeasure system.”

The California Attorneys for Criminal Justice also opposed Hill’s bill, saying it would take away discretion in sentencing from judges.

Frank Harris, MADD’s director of government affairs, said critics shouldn’t block a change that he depicted as certain to save lives. “Interlocks are much more effective than just hoping for the best with license suspensions,” Harris told the San Mateo Daily Journal. “MADD welcomes further studies, but that shouldn’t be a reason to hold up a life-changing bill and put forth a better policy for society.”

If Brown signs SB1046, it will take effect in 2019 and expire in 2026.

At a Governmental Organization Committee hearing on Tuesday, proponents of AB 183 claimed that self service checkouts contribute to underage drinking, while opponents of the bill point out that self-service checkout machines do not.

The bill’s opponents claimed that supporters’ justified the bill using underage drinking statistics.  But during the hearing, Senator Roderick Wright (D-Los Angeles) questioned if the statistics pertained to the issue at all. “What does that have to do with the bill at all?” Wright asked the representative from Mothers Against Drunk Driving, who had just shared a litany of underage drinking tragedies. “What evidence do you have that self-checkouts contribute to underage drinking?” Wright pressed.

The MADD representative said he’d have to defer to another witness for the answer.

Reverend John Hughes of the Methodist Ministry group, called the self check outs a “virtual vending machine,” and expressed his support for the bill.

One claim by supporters was that underage drinkers will go through the check out stand with a six pack of soda and then replace the soda with a six pack of beer as they bag their purchases.

Opponent National Cash Register Corporation, the maker of self check out machines, says this is not valid.  According to NCR, “There are weight differences and they can be detected at the machine.”

Many at the hearing asked if self check out machines are not specifically contributing to underage alcohol sales, why proponents of the bill are urging its passage?

“I don’t know what the big deal is,” said a representative from the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. He explained that Costco clerks are required by law to not only check the ID of people that might be underage, but to make sure that every person who buys alcohol is not intoxicated. “If they fail to do this they get fired,” he repeated emphatically.

The California Retailers Association also opposed Ma’s bill, and stated that, “Unfortunately youth are getting access to alcohol, but they aren’t getting it from self checkouts. It’s just not true.”

One of the strong arguments against the bill was the attempt by government to pass another business regulation where one is not warranted.  Opponents insisted that self checkout stands do not actually contribute to underage drinking, but even if they did, the issues should be solved by the businesses rather than legislators.

“It’s really a labor issue, a training issue… perhaps there are additional tensions going on with clerks having a number of machines that they have to oversee,” said Paul Gladfelty, representing NCR. “That may be a valid issue, but its not a valid issue for the legislature.”

Wright said the committee would take the bill up again in two weeks after amending some of the bill’s language  – particularly how online sales were addressed.

JUNE 17, 2011